^v  OF  mn^f^ 


:^BOL 


BV  811  .C2 
Campbell,  Alexander 
Christian  baptism 


06ICAL  St^ 


CHRISTIA:tir  BAPTISM 


"WITH   ITS 


ANTECEDENTS  AND  CONSEQUENTS. 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL. 


"ONE   LORD,   ONE    FAITH,    ONE   BAPTISM." 


BETHANY,    VA.: 

PRINTED  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL. 

1851. 


Western  District  op  Virqinia,  to  wit: 

Be  it  remembered,  That  on  the  18th  day  of  February,  Anno  Domini  1851,  Alex- 
ANDER  Campbell,  of  the  said  District,  hath  deposited  in  this  Office  the  title  of  a 
book ;  the  title  of  which  is  in  the  words  following,  to  wit :— "  Christian  Baptism, 
•with  its  Antecedents  and  Consequents;"  the  right  whereof  he  claims  as  author  and 
proprietor,  in  conformity  with  the  Act  of  Congress,  entitled  An  Act  to  amend  the 
eeverjil  Jkcts  respecting  copyrights. 

ERASMUS  STRIBLING, 
Clerk  of  the  Western  District  of  Virginia. 


8X£R£0TTPED  BY  L.  JOHNSON  AND  CO. 
FHILASSLPBU. 


BBiimtinn, 


To  Baptists  of  every  name  and  parti/,  in  tTie  United  States  of 
America  and  in  the  British  Provinces,  who  speak  our  vernacular , 
as  an  humble  Tribute  of  his  respect  and  esteem,  on  account  of  their 
uniform  and  persevering  advocacy  of  freedom  of  thought,  of  speech, 
and  of  action,  in  all  that  pertains  to  the  rights  of  conscience  and 
to  civil  liberty,  as  well  as  for  their  constant  and  untiring  efforts 
to  sustain  the  Apostolic  institution  of  Christian  Baptism:  And 
especially  to  those  who  plead  for  the  Union  and  Co-operation  of 
all  who  love  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity,  on  the  basis  of 
"One  Lord,  one  Faith,  one  Baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of 
ALL,  ONE  Body,  one  Spirit,  and  one  Hope,"  this  Volume  is  rer 
spectfully  and  affectionately  inscribed  by 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


The  important  question  of  Christian  Baptism  is  yet,  with 
many,  an  undecided  question.  With  many,  too,  it  has  been  de- 
cided wrong,  because  decided  on  human  authority,  or  on  partial 
evidence,  without  personal  and  proper  examination.  Neither 
Christian  faith  nor  Christian  character  can  be  inherited,  as  the 
goods  and  chattels  of  this  world.  There  is  no  royal  or  ancestral 
path  to  faith,  piety,  or  humanity.  Whatever  truly  elevates, 
adorns,  or  dignifies  a  human  being,  must  be,  more  or  less,  the 
fruit  of  his  own  efforts. 

Five  points  are  necessarily  involved  in  this  discussion,  essen- 
tial to  a  rational  and  scriptural  decision  of  the  question.  These 
are :  1.  The  action,  called  baptism.  2.  The  subject  of  that  action. 
3.  TlhQ. design  of  that  action.  4.  The  antecedents;  and,  5.  The 
consequents  of  that  action.  These  are  distinct  topics,  each  of 
"which  must  be  scripturally  apprehended  in  its  evangelical  im- 
port and  bearings,  before  this  solemn  and  sublime  symbol  can 
be  truly  enjoyed  in  its  spiritual  influences  and  importance. 
And  such  is  the  prominent  and  imposing  attitude  in  which  its 
Author  placed  it,  when,  in  giving  a  commission  to  his  apostles 
to  convert  the  nations  of  the  earth  to  him,  he  makes  this  the 
consummating  act  of  their  preaching  Christ — of  converting  and 
evangelizing  the  world.     "Go,"  said  he,  "into  all  the  world, 


6  *  PREFACE. 

convert  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Misconceptions  of  this  institution  are,  it  has  been  often  re- 
marked, more  or  less  connected  with  misconceptions  of  the 
"whole  Christian  institution,  and  lie  as  the  sub-basis  of  the  pre- 
sent apostasy  from  original  Christianity.  By  the  grand  "  Mo- 
ther of  Harlots"  and  delusions,  it  has  been  degraded  to  the  rank 
of  a  mere  rite  or  ceremony,  and  made  a  door  of  admission,  wide 
as  the  whole  world,  into  the  bosom  of  what  is  impiously  called 
*'  The  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ." 

In  view  of  this,  the  following  treatise  discusses  the  whole 
subject,  in  what  its  author  esteems  its  natural  and  logical  order, 
placing  before  the  mind  of  the  reader  each  and  every  point,  in 
its  proper  position  and  relative  importance  to  the  whole  institu- 
tion. This  gives  a  somewhat  miscellaneous  appearance  to  the 
volume ;  but,  in  view  of  the  whole  premises,  it  will,  he  hopes, 
make  it  more  really  useful  and  satisfactory  to  every  reader,  so 
much  interested  in  the  subject  as  to  give  it  a  candid  and  careful 
perusal. 

The  author  regards  the  antecedents  and  consequents  of  Chris- 
tian Baptism,  as  furnishing  not  only  much  material  for  profit- 
able reflection,  on  the  part  of  every  earnest  inquirer  after  the 
truth  and  design  of  Christianity,  but  as  also  furnishing  argu- 
ments in  support  of  the  divine  origin,  authority,  and  value  of 
Christian  Baptism,  necessary  to  an  intelligent  and  satisfactory 
decision  of  the  much  litigated  questions.  What  is  Christian 
Baptism  f  and  What  are  the  benefits  thereof? 

He  has  condensed  a  very  large  amount  and  variety  of  materials 
on  the  special  questions,  What  is  Christian  Baptism  ?  Who  are 
its  legitimate  subjects?  and  What  its  specific  design?  into  as 
small  a  space  as  possible,  not  desiring  to  say  even  a  moiety  of 
what  he  might  say  on  the  premises.  Much  of  what  is  said  is 
designed  to  be  suggestive  to  the  mind  of  the  reader,  rather  than 
to  leave  him  nothing  to  do  but  to  read  what  is  written ;  to  open 
to  his  mind  the  unwasting  fountains  of  light  and  knowledge 


PREFACE.  7 

contained  in  the  Divine  Records  of  eternal  wisdom  and  provi- 
dence, that  he  may  see,  in  the  clear,  full,  and  certain  light  of 
God's  own  book,  the  glorious  scheme  of  redemption,  as  indicated 
in  the  precious  and  sublime  symbol  of  Christian  Baptism. 

The  continual  agitation  of  this  subject  is  important  and  be- 
nevolent, so  long  as  unscriptural  views  of  it  are  not  only  enter- 
tained, but  made  the  bitter  root  of  discord  amongst  good  men, 
and  of  schism  in  the  Christian  profession.  Truth  ever  gains, 
and  error  uniformly  loses,  by  discussion.  The  results  of  the 
discussions  of  this  subject  during  the  last  thirty  years,  are  at 
least  the  addition  of  a  hundred  thousand  persons  to  the  profes- 
sion of  "  one  Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism ;"  and,  so  far, 
have  contributed  to  the  triumph  of  truth,  the  union  of  Christians, 
and  the  conversion  of  the  world.  We,  therefore,  commend  to 
the  blessing  of  the  Lord,  this  new  offering  on  our  part  to  the 
advancement  of  truth  in  the  world,  and  as  an  humble  means 
of  promoting  the  cause  of  Christian  union  and  co-operation 
amongst  all  who  love  Zion  and  seek  the  peace  and  happiness 
of  Jerusalem. 


CONTENTS. 


Page 

Intboduction 13 


BOOK  I. 

ANTECEDENTS    OP  BAPTISM. 

Chap.  L— The  Bible 23 

II.— The  Bible 36 

in — The  Bible — Principles  of  Interpretation 49 

IV.— Faith 63 

V. — Repentance  unto  Life 76 

VI. — Covenants  of  Promise — Circumcision 89 

VII. — Flesh  and  Spirit — Liberty  and  Necessity — New  In- 
stitution   102 

BOOK  IL 

ACTION   OF   BAPTISM. 

Chap.  I. — Bapio — The  root  of  Baptize 116 

II. — Baptizo — Greek  Lexicographers 122 

III. — Ancient  Versions 134 

IV.— English  Translations 139 

V. — Reformers,  Annotators,  Paraphrasts,  and  Critics...  144 
VI. — English  Lexicographers,  Encyclopedias,  and  Review- 
ers of  the  Pedobaptist  School 149 

9 


10  contents/ 

VII. — Words  used  in  construction  with  Bapfizo,  Raino,  Ran- 

tizo,  Cheo,  and  Louo,  such  as  epi,  en,  eis,  ek,  apo  153 
VIII. — The  Places  where  Baptism  was  anciently  adminis- 
tered   157 

IX. — Apostolic  Allusions  to  Baptism 161 

X. — Passages  urged  against  Immersion  from  the  use  of 

Baptizo  and  Baptismos  in  certain  places 166 

XL— Legal  Sprinklings 171 

XIL— Convertible  Terms 178 

XIII. — History  of  Immersion  and  Sprinkling 181 

BOOK  IIL 

SUBJECTS    OF   BAPTISM. 

Chap.  I. — Subjects  of  John's  Baptism 205 

II._Subjects  of  Christian  Baptism— Induction  of  New 

Testament  Cases 219 

III. — Subjects  of  Baptism  and  Subjects  of  Circumcision 

contrasted 233 


BOOK  IV. 

DESIGN   OF   BAPTISM. 

Chap.  L— Design  of  Baptism 247 

IL— Design  of  Baptism 259 


BOOK  V. 

CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

Chap.  I. — Adoption 274 

IL— Justification 277 

IIL— Sanctification 285 


CONTENTS.  11 

BOOK  VI. 

RBVIEWS  OF  THE  ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Page 

Chap.  I. — Review  of  Bishop  Kenrick's  Treatise 313 

II. — Review  of  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton 326 

III. — Review  of  Prof.  Miller,  of  Princeton ;  and  Dr.  Wall, 

Vicar  of  Shorem,  in  Kent 339 

IV.— Review  of  Prof.  Miller,  of  Princeton ;  and  Dr.  Wall, 

Vicar  of  Shorem,  and  others 352 

v.— Review  of  Prof.  Miller,  Dr.  Wall,  &c.,  continued...  365 

VI.— Review  of  Dr.  Kurtz,  and  Rev.  Mr.  Hall 378 

VII.— Review  of  Prof.  Stuart,  of  Andover 392 

VIII.— The  Evil  of  Infant  Baptism 405 

IX.— Review  of  Dr.  C.  Taylor,  Editor  of  Calmet's  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Bible 417 

X. — One  hundred  and  thirty-four  Questions  on  Infant 

Baptism .'. 422 

Appendix 437 


INTRODUCTION. 


Christianity  has  its  theory  and  its  practice.  Its  theory  is 
the  Sacred  Writings  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists  of  Jesus 
Christ ;  its  practice,  the  life  of  the  Christian.  The  Christian 
profession  is  not  now  what  it  once  was.  It  has  become  secular 
and  sectarian.  The  members  of  the  church  of  Christ  were  for- 
merly called  ** saints/^  "elect  of  God,"  "a  chosen  generation/' 
"a  royal  priesthood,"  "a  peculiar  people."  Now  they  are 
called  "Churchmen,"  "Dissenters,"  "Romanists,"  "Protest- 
ants," "Episcopalians,"  "Presbyterians,"  "Independents,'' 
"Baptists,"  "Methodists,"  &c.  &c.  &c.  The  church  was  once 
"  a  spiritual  house,"  whose  members  were  addressed  as  "justi- 
fied," "  sanctified,"  "  adopted,"  and  "  saved."  It  was  "  a  holy 
nation"  whose  citizens  had  their  citizenship  in  heaven.  Such 
were  its  designations,  and  such  was  its  general  character.  The 
exceptions  were  comparatively  few.  These  mostly  renounced 
the  profession  and  went  back  into  the  world.  "  They  went  out 
from  us  because  they  were  not  of  us,"  said  the  beloved  John ; 
"  for  had  they  been  of  us  they  would  no  doubt  have  continued 
wiiJi  us ;  but  they  went  out  that  they  might  be  made  manifest 
that  ihei/  ivere  not  all  of  us  J  ^ 

But  that  such  would  not  always  be  the  character  of  the  Chris- 
tian profession,  was  clearly  foreseen  and  distinctly  foretold  by 
the  holy  Apostles.  "  There  shall  come  a  falling  away" — "  an 
apostasy,"  said  Paul.  He  adds,  "A  Man  of  Sin,"  "the  Son 
OF  Perdition,"  will  come,  and  must  be  developed.  His  cha- 
racter is  delineated,  as  proud,  haughty,  and  secular.  He  was, 
indeed,  to  be  a  churchman — to  "  sit  in  the  temple  of  God."    He 

2  13 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

would  exalt  himself  amongst  and  above  the  gods  of  earth — ^the 
kings  and  monarchs  of  nations.  This  mystic  character  would 
gain  the  ascendency  by  assumed  powers; — "signs,"  "miracles 
of  falsehood,"  and  "  with  all  the  deceitfulness  of  unrighteous- 
ness," amongst  them  "  who  did  not  love  the  truth,"  but  had 
pleasure  in  iniquity.  Indeed,  "  the  Spirit  speaketh  expressly, 
that  in  the  latter  days"  a  portion  of  the  Christian  profession 
*'  would  depart  from  the  faith,"  giving  heed  to  seducing  preach- 
ers, and  "  to  doctrines  concerning  the  spirits  of  dead  men ;" 
"  speaking  lies  in  hypocrisy,  having  their  conscience  seared  aa 
with  a  hot  iron."  They  would  preach  a  monastic  life,  advocate 
celibacy,  "forbidding  to  marry,"  observing  lent,  "commanding 
to  abstain  from  meats  which  God  has  created  to  be  received 
with  thanksgiving,  being  sanctified  by  the  word  of  God  and 
prayer." 

Indeed,  the  Apostle  informs  us  that  "  as  there  were  false  pro- 
phets among  the  people"  in  former  times,  "  so  there  should  be 
false  teachers  as  well  as  false  professors  among  the  people  of 
Ood,  who  should  bring  in  "  condemnable  heresies  ;" — reprobate 
schisms,  and  "destructive  sects."  While  acknowledging  Jesus 
as  a  teacher  or  prophet,  and  from  God,  they  would  undermine 
his  divinity,  "denying  the  Lord  that  bought  them,"  "who  gave 
his  life  a  ransom  for  many,"  and  "  who  redeemed  us  to  God  by 
his  blood."  He  adds,  "  Many  shall  follow  their  pernicious  ways, 
by  reason  of  whom  the  way  of  truth  shall  be  evil  spoken  of." 

Now  all  this  will  be  done  "  for  filthy  lucre's  sake."  "  Through 
covetousness  shall  they  with  feigned  words"  (of  piety)  "  make 
merchandise  of  you."  Their  example  will  lead  to  skepticism 
and  general  infidelity ;  **  for,"  says  the  same  Apostle,  know  this 
especially,  "  that  in  the  last  days  scoffers  shall  come,  walking 
after  their  own  lusts,"  saying,  "  Where  is  the  promise  of  his 
coming ;  for  all  things  go  on  as  they  did  from  the  beginning  of 
the  world  ?"  The  mother  of  all  this  apostasy  and  infidelity  is 
compared  to  a  charlatan,  or  rather  to  a  courtezan  very  gayly  and 
fashionably  attired.  "  She  is  arrayed  in  purple  and  scarlet, 
decked  with  gold  and  precious  stones  and  pearls,  having  a 
golden  chalice  in  her  hands  full  of  abominations,"  the  rewards 
of  "  the  filthiness  of  her  fornications."  She  wears  a  splendid 
tiara  magnificently  adorned ;  but  when  deciphered  and  fairly 
interpreted,  it  means,  "Babylon  the  Great,  the  Mother  op 
Harlots,"  and  Parent  of  all  Abominations. 


INTRODUCTION.  15 

Such  is  a  portion  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Christian  profession 
as  foretold  by  the  Apostles.  We  have  seen  it ;  nay,  we  live  in 
the  midst  of  it.  This  "  Man  of  Sin"  still  lives  in  Eome,  and 
pretends  to  be  "  the  Vicar  of  Christ"  and  '*  the  Prince  of  the 
Apostles." 

A  reformation  of  Popery  was  attempted  in  Europe  full  three 
centuries  ago.  It  ended  in  a  Protestant  hierarchy,  and  swarms 
of  dissenters.  Protestantism  has  been  reformed  into  Presby- 
terianism, — that  into  Congregationalism, — and  that  into  Bap- 
tistism,  &c.  &c.  Methodism  has  attempted  to  reform  all,  but 
has  reformed  itself  into  many  forms  of  Wesleyism.  None  of 
these  has  begun  at  the  right  place.  All  Of  them  retain  in  their 
bosom,  in  their  ecclesiastic  organizations,  worship,  doctrines, 
and  observances,  various  relics  of  Popery.  They  are,  at  best, 
but  a  reformation  of  Popery,  and  only  reformations  in  part. 
The  doctrines  and  traditions  of  men  yet  impair  the  power  and 
progress  of  the  gospel  in  their  hands ;  and,  therefore,  as  com- 
munities, they  are  not  distinguished  by  the  ancient  piety,  zeal, 
and  humanity,  nor  for  their  efforts  and  success  in  evangelizing 
the  world  at  home  or  abroad.  It  is  probable  that  as  many  of 
their  own  offspring  are  converted  to  the  world,  or  to  infidelity, 
as  they  have  reclaimed  from  the  world  and  the  various  forms  of 
infidelity,  during  any  given  period  of  years.  Most  of  the  So- 
cialists, Agrarians,  Fourierists,  Owenists,  Rationalists,  Pusey- 
ists,  &c.,  now  in  Protestant  countries,  are  of  Protestant  ancestry. 
Our  missionary  gains  from  heathen  lands  do  not  more,  at  most, 
than  fill  up  the  apostasies  from  Protestant  households  to  the 
numerous  and  various  forms  of  infidelity. 

Living  then,  as  we  do,  in  the  midst  of  such  abortive  efforts  at 
reformation;  seeing  the  progress  of  error,  and  regretting  the 
feeble  and  slow  advances  of  the  gospel  upon  even  the  outposts 
of  error,  infidelity,  and  abounding  iniquity,  we  are  constrained 
to  inquire,  if  any  thing  can  be  done ;  and,  if  any  thing,  what 
should  it  be,  and  how  attempted  ?  To  fight  the  old  battles  over 
again,  to  rally  under  the  old  banners  of  Calvinism,  or  Arminian- 
ism ;  to  propose  some  Episcopalian,  Presbyterian,  Congregational, 
or  Methodist  platform  of  improvement,  either  of  theory  or  prac- 
tice, or  to  adopt  Scotch,  English,  or  American  Baptistism,  could 
promise  nothing  better  than  that  which  already  is,  or  has  hereto- 
fore been.  These  have  all  been  tried.  Their  whole  moral  and 
spiritual  power  has  been  made  to  bear  upon  the  present  condi- 


16  INTRODUCTION. 

tions  and  past  conditions  of  sectarianized  Christianity.  And 
what  have  they  done  ?  "What  can  they  do  better  than  they  have 
already  done?  Do  the  new  parties  called  ''Reformed^'  enjoy 
more  spirituality,  more  union,  more  harmony  and  peace  among 
themselves,  than  the  old  ones  ?  Are  they  more  benevolent,  more 
liberal,  more  active,  or  more  successful  in  converting  the  world, 
than  the  old  ones  ?  Or  do  they  seek  to  unite  the  faithful,  or  to 
bring  all  Protestant  parties  into  one  communion?  Are  they 
more  successful  in  active  benevolence  than  those  who  preceded 
them  ?  These  are  questions  which,  as  far  as  I  am  informed, 
must  all  be  answered  in  the  negative.  From  them  united  on 
any  one  of  these  creeds,  or  from  them  as  they  now  are,  can  we 
expect  a  better  state  of  things,  internal  or  external  ?  If  so,  we 
ask  them  for  the  proof.  Till  that  is  given,  we  shall,  because  we 
must,  despair  of  it. 

All  creeds  are  mere  theories  of  Christian  doctrine,  discipline, 
and  government,  exhibited  as  a  basis  of  church  union.  Being 
speculative,  they  have  always  proved  themselves  to  be  "  apples 
of  discord''  or  "  roots  of  bitterness"  amongst  the  Christian  pro- 
fession. They  have,  in  days  of  yore,  erected  pillories,  founded 
prisons,  provoked  wars,  kindled  fires,  consecrated  autos  da  fe, 
instituted  star-chambers,  courts  of  high  commission,  and  horrible 
tribunals  of  Papal  inquisition.  Exile,  banishment,  confiscation 
of  goods,  lands,  and  tenements,  and  martyrdom,  have  been  their 
convincing  logic,  their  persuasive  rhetoric,  and  their  tender 
mercies. 

Having  long  reflected  upon  these  premises — these  creeds, 
schisms,  and  parties — as  well  as  on  the  Sacred  Writings  of 
Apostles  and  Prophets,  and  the  primitive  communities  founded 
on  them,  we  are  fully  convinced  that  neither  Popery,  nor  any 
of  its  Protestant  reformations,  is  the  Christian  Institution  de- 
livered to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  What  is  Popery,  but  the 
extreme  of  defection  and  apostasy?  What  is  Prelacy,  but  a 
reformed  modification  of  Popery?  What  is  Presbyterianism, 
but  a  reform  of  Prelacy  ?  What  is  Congregationalism,  or  Inde- 
pendency, but  a  reform  of  Presbyterianism?  And  what  is 
Wesleyan  Methodism,  but  a  popular  emendation  of  English 
Episcopacy,  combined  with  the  enthusiasm  of  ancient  Quaker- 
ism ?  Amonst  them  all,  we  thank  the  grace  of  God  that  there 
are  many  who  bolicvo  in,  and  love  the  Saviour,  and  that,  though 
wo  may  not  have  Christian  churches,  we  have  many  Christians: 


INTRODUCTION.  17 

Is  not  this  as  obvious  and  intelligible  as  that  while  there  are 
many  republicans  in  England,  France,  Belgium,  Italy,  Spain, 
and  Germany,  there  is  not  in  them  all  one  republic ! 

Protestant  parties  are  all  founded  upon  Protestant  peculiari- 
ties. Indeed,  there  is  but  one  radical  and  distinctive  idea  in 
any  one  of  them.  That  is,  their  centre  of  attraction  and  of 
radiation.  They  baptize  themselves  at  the  laver  of  that  idea, 
and  assume  the  name  of  it,  whatever  it  may  be.  Episcopalian, 
Presbyterian,  or  Methodist,  &c.  &c.  They  build  on  what  isN 
peculiar,  and  thus,  in  effect,  undervalue  that  which  is  common  j 
to  them  all.  And  yet,  themselves  being  judges,  that  which  is 
common  is  much  more  valuable  than  that  which  is  peculiar. 
The  sub-basis  of  all  parties  is  the  tenet  which  is  their  cognomen. 
The  difference  between  a  Churchman  and  a  Presbyterian  is 
neither  Calvinism  nor  Arminianism,  faith  nor  repentance, 
righteousness  nor  holiness,  baptism  nor  the  eucharist,  but  the 
politics  of  ecclesiastical  organization — the  policy  called  Episco- 
pacy or  Presbytery — the  single  idea  of  one  Bishop,  or  two 
Bishops  in  one  church,  a  Prelate  or  a  Presbytery.  Every  other 
peculiarity  is  but  the  colouring,  modification,  or  development  of 
this  idea.     This  consecrates  the  sacramental  table. 

Now,  it  appears  to  us,  the  things  which  are  most  commonly 
believed  are  most  valuable,  certainly  much  more  valuable  than 
any  one  of  the  partisan  peculiarities.  The  things  most  com- 
monly believed  are,  of  course,  most  evident ;  and  generally  in 
the  ratio  of  the  evidence  in  proof  of  any  fact  or  proposition  is 
its  value.  Eomanists  and  Protestants  of  almost  every  name 
believe  that  "Christ  died  for  our  sins,"  and  that  "he  was  bu- 
ried," and  that  "he  rose  again  the  third  day"  according  to 
prophecy.  These,  the  Apostle  Paul  says,  will  save  any  man 
that  believes  them ;  if,  indeed,  he  do  practically  believe  them. 
But  who  can  say  this  of  any  one  of  the  partisan  foundations  ? 
Of  the  Papal  seven  sacraments  but  two  are  held  in  common 
among  all  Protestants.  These  are  Christian  baptism  and  the 
Lord's  supper.  And  who  will  not  say  that  these  two  are  infi- 
nitely more  valuable  than  either  marriage  or  extreme  unction, 
or  any  or  all  the  five  reputed  as  such  ?  We  conclude,  then,  that 
a  party  founded  on  all  that  is  commonly  received  by  Roman- 
ists, Greeks,  and  Protestants,  and  nothing  more,  would  not  only 
be  a  new  party,  one  entirely  new,  but  incomparably  more  ra- 
tional, and  certainly  more  scriptural  than  any  of  them. 

2* 


1S>  INTRODUCTION. 

From  a  full  survey  of  the  premises  of  ecclesiastical  history, 
of  human  creeds  and  sects, — and  especially  from  a  profound  re- 
gard for  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  that  guided,  and  the  Spirit 
that  inspired  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  qualified 
them  to  reveal  his  will, — we  have  proposed  an  Evangelical  Refor- 
mation— or,  rather,  a  return  to  the  faith  and  manners  anciently 
delivered  to  the  saints — a  restoratiox  of  original  Chv^tianity 
both  in  theory  and  practice.  The  three  capital  points  of  which 
are: — 

I.  The  Christian  Scriptures,  the  only  rule  and  measure  of 
Christian  faith  and  learning. 

II.  The  Christian  confession,  the  foundation  of  Christian 
union  and  communion. 

III.  The  Christian  ordinances — baptism,  the  Lord's  day,  and 
the  Lord's  supper, — as  taught  and  observed  by  the  Apostles. 

Of  these  three  fundamental  propositions  we  need  not,  indeed 
"we  cannot,  now  speak  particularly. 

Concerning  the  first,  it  would  seem  enough  to  say,  that  as  the 
Christian  writings  are  the  production  of  the  Holy  Spirit  speak- 
ing to  us  through  the  ministers  of  Christ,  they  are  just  what 
they  ought  to  be.  The  Spirit  of  God  being  "the  Spirit  of  wis- 
dom and  knowledge,"  the  Spirit  of  eloquence  and  revelation, 
author  of  the  gift  of  tongues,  and  "the  Advocate'^  of  Christ,  he 
certainly  could  and  did  select  the  best  forms  of  human  language 
in  which  to  communicate  the  mind  and  will  of  God  to  man. 
He  possesses  infinitely  more  wisdom,  learning,  and  eloquence, 
than  all  the  Councils  and  General  Assemblies  that  ever  met. 
Hence  the  Christian  Scriptures,  when  fairly  translated,  are  more 
intelligible,  comprehensive,  and  consequently  better  adapted  to 
the  whole  family  of  man,  than  any  formula  of  Christian  doctrine 
ever  delivered  to  man.  If,  then,  we  cannot  unite,  and  harmonize 
all  discords,  upon  God's  own  book,  in  vain  shall  we  attempt  it 
on  the  books  of  men.  They  are,  indeed,  the  only  perfect  and 
complete  rule  and  standard  of  Christian  faith  and  manners, 
adapted  to  man  as  he  is,  contemplated  in  both  his  individual  and 
social  character — in  the  family,  church,  and  national  relations 
of  life. 

The  Christian  confession,  into  which  we  are  baptized,  and  on 
which  we  are  admitted  into  the  church  of  God,  has  been  ren- 
dered superlatively  conspicuous  by  the  emphasis  laid  on  it  by 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  person,  when  he  first  elicited  it  at 


INTRODUCTION.  19 

Cesarea  Phlllppi,  from  that  Apostle  whose  name  was  Simon 
Rock,  or,  in  Greek,  Simon  Peter.  The  question  propounded  to 
the  Apostles  was,  ^^Who  do  you  say  that  I,  the  Son  of  Man,  amf 
Cephas  responded,  "Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
Living  God."  On  this,  the  Saviour  responded,  "  Thou  art  called 
rock,  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  and  the 
gates  of  hades  shall  not  prevail  against  it." 

This  confession  must  be  made  by  every  applicant  for  Christian 
baptism  in  order  to  his  being  constitutionally  builded  upon  the 
divine  foundation;  or,  as  we  usually  say,  admitted  into  the 
Christian  kingdom  or  church.  No  minister,  or  church  of  Jesus 
Christ,  has  any  divine  right  or  authority  to  ask  for  more  or  ac- 
cept of  less  than  this,  in  order  to  Christian  baptism.  We  ought, 
indeed,  to  know  that  the  person  so  professing  understands  what 
he  says,  and  gives  evidence  of  the  sincerity  of  his  confession : 
but  farther  than  this  neither  right  reason  nor  revelation  interro- 
gates any  man,  Jew  or  Gentile.  We  need  not  add  that  no  one 
can  believe,  repent,  make  confession,  or  be  baptized  by  proxy, 
or  upon  another  person's  confession.  Christianity  being  per- 
sonal, both  in  its  subject  and  object,  it  is  neither  family  nor 
national.  Every  individual  "must  be  born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit"  in  order  to  admission  into  the  present  dispensation  of 
the  kingdom  of  God. 

Concerning  the  other  Christian  ordinances,  we  observe  that, 
Being  monumental  of  the  Christian  facts — Christ's  death,  burial, 
and  resurrection — and  containing  in  them  the  grace  of  God; 
being  also  social  in  their  nature,  they  are  weekly  institutions, 
and  to  be  diligently  observed  by  all  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus 
in  their  public  weekly  assemblies.  They  are,  therefore,  essential 
parts  of  "  the  communion  of  saints." 

As  for  prayer  and  praise,  they  are,  indeed,  Christian  institu- 
tions ;  but  not  exclusively  so.  The  altar,  the  priest,  and  the 
victim,  prayer  and  praise,  belong  to  no  age,  dispensation,  or 
form  of  religion.  They  are  religion  itself.  Without  these  Jive, 
there  is  no  religion.  There  was  no  patriarchal  nor  Jewish,  there 
is  no  Christian  institution  of  religion,  without  these  media  of 
reconciliation  and  worship.  We  Christians,  indeed,  have  an 
altar,  a  high-priest,  and  a  sacrifice,  infinitely  more  sublime  and 
glorious  than  any  one  around  which  Patriarchs  or  Jews  ever 
assembled. 

But  though  we  have  no  private,  no  family  altar,  priest,  or 


20  INTRODUCTION. 

Bacrifice,  we  have  our  personal  and  our  Christian  family  prayer 
and  praise,  without  which  Christian  parents  cannot  possibly 
bring  up  their  families  "  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the 
Lord/' 

There  is  also  the  Christian  fellowship,  or  contributions  for 
the  expenditure  of  the  church  of  Christ,  in  its  various  works  of 
righteousness  and  benevolence.  The- expenses  of  a  community, 
and  the  benevolence  of  a  community,  must  also  be  public  as  well 
as  private  and  personal.  This  was  anciently  called  "  the  fel- 
lowship." In  attending  upon  it,  in  our  weekly  assemblies,  we 
become  followers  of  the  primitive  churches,  and  enjoy  the  luxury 
of  socially  practising  righteousness  and  mercy  on  the  Lord's  day. 

That  Evangelical  Reformation,  now  in  progress,  extending 
over  the  United  States  and  the  English  provinces  in  America, 
and  being  now  plead  in  the  kingdoms  of  England,  Ireland,  and 
Scotland,  and  in  other  places,  embracing  from  two  to  three 
hundred  thousand  professors,  in  addition  to  these  fundamental 
matters  of  scriptural  and  divine  authority,  exhibits  two  other 
propositions  besides  those  three  named,  as  vital  and  all-import- 
ant to  the  restoration  of  original  Christianity  in  faith  and  prac- 
tice, in  letter  and  in  spirit.     These  are — 

1.  That  instead  of  the  modern  ecclesiastic  and  sectarian 
terminology,  or  technical  style,  we  adopt  Bible  names  for 
Bible  things.  For  example: — Instead  of  "sacraments,"  we 
prefer  ordinances;  for  "the  Eucharist,"  the  Lord's  Supper;  for 
"covenant  of  works,"  the  law;  for  "covenant  of  grace,"  the 
gospel;  for  "Testament,"  Institution  or  Covenant;  for  "Trinity," 
Godhead;  for  "first,  second,  and  third  person,"  the  Father,  t^ie 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit;  for  "Eternal  Son,"  the  Son  of  God; 
for  " original  sin,"  ^^e /aZ^  or  the  offence;  for  "Christian  Sab- 
bath," Loi-d's  day  or  First  day ;  for  "eflfectual  calling,"  calling 
or  obedience;  for  "merits  of  Christ,"  righteousness  or  sacrifice 
oj" Christ;  for  "general  atonement,"  ransoin  for  all ;  for  "free 
grace,"  grace;  for  "free  will,"  tvill,  &c.  &c. 

As  the  Lord  promised  by  Zephaniah,  that  in  order  to  union 
amongst  his  people,  he  would  give  them  "  a  pure  language,  that 
they  might  all  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  to  serve  him  with 
one  consent,"  so  every  effort  at  evangelical  reformation  must,  to 
heal  divisions  and  to  prevent  debate  among  Christians — aim  at 
a  "  pure  language,"  the  language  of  Canaan,  and  avoid  that  of 
Ashdud, — calling  Bible  things  by  Bible  words. 


INTRODUCTION".  21 

2.  The  second  grand  proposition  essential  to  an  evangelical 
reformation — to  Christian  union  and  co-operation  in  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  is, — that  unity  of  faith,  and  not  unity  of  opinion^ 
must  be  publicly  and  privately  taught  and  advocated  as  pre- 
requisite to  the  communion  of  the  children  of  God. 

The  Bible,  without  regard  to  its  books  or  dispensations,  \h 
properly  divided  into  three  grand  elements.  These  are  properly 
called  facts,  precepts,  and  promises.  AU  these,  it  is  true,  might 
be  called  facts,  as  all  books  might  be  called  words.  But  in  the 
usual  appropriated  sense,  we  call  any  thing  said  or  done,  a  fad; 
any  thing  commanded  to  be  done,  a  precept ;  and  any  thing  pyro- 
mised  to  be  done,  a  promise.  This  distinction  greatly  reduces 
the  subjects  of  debate — the  "doctrines,"  "strifes  of  words," 
and  "endless  genealogies,"  which  "minister  questions  and 
doubts,  rather  than  godly  edifying,"  and  makes  it  quite  possible, 
amidst  many  diversities  of  opinion,  to  maintain  "  unity  of  spirit 
in  the  bonds  of  peace."  Each  of  the  three  dispensations  had 
its  own  facts,  precepts,  and  promises.  The  things  said  and 
done  by  God  and  men  from  Adam  to  Moses,  constitute  its  Patri- 
archal facts ;  those  from  Moses  to  Christ,  its  Jewish  facts  ;  and 
those  from  Christ  to  the  end  of  the  apostolic  writings,  its  Chris- 
tian facts.  Each  of  these  three  had  also  its  own  peculiar  pre- 
cepts and  promises. 

Now  as  facts  are  only  to  be  believed,  precepts  to  be  obeyed,  and 
promises  to  be  enjoyed  and  hoped  foi\  as  well  as  believed,  we  can 
very  easily  and  perspicuously  distinguish  what  constitutes  Chris- 
tian faith,  Christian  obedience,  and  Christian  hope,  not  only 
from  the  Jewish  and  the  Patriarchal,  but  also  from  all  matters 
of  speculation  usually  called  opinions.  We  must  be,  because 
we  can  be,  of  one  faith,  of  one  obedience,  and  of  one  hope ;  but 
we  need  not  be,  because  we  cannot  be,  of  one  opinion,  not  being 
of  one  mental  or  physical  constitution.  Hence  the  propriety 
and  the  beauty  of  that  apostolic  exhortation,  "  Endeavouring  to 
keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bonds  of  peace ;  for  there  is 
one  body,  and  one  Spirit,  even  as  you  are  called  in  one  hope  of 
your  calling;  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and 
Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all." 

These  seven  reasons,  without  regard  to  differences  of  opinion, 
are  the  divine  basis  of  Christian  union,  and  should  be  of  all 
Christian  co-operation.  We  ask  no  more — we  propose  no  less. 
*' Matters  of  doubtful  disputations,"  or,  properly,  matters  of 


22  INTRODUCTION. 

mere  speculative  belief,  have  no  authority  but  the  reason  of  man. 
Paul,  therefore,  comj^aands,  **  Receive  him  that  is  weak  in  the 
faith  without  regard  to  differences  of  opinion ;"  and  "  Let  the 
strong  bear  the  infirmities  of  the  weak,  and  not  please  them- 
selves," or  have  their  own  way.  We  then  lay  a  divine  basis  of 
Christian  union.  We  ask  for  faith,  and  not  for  the  deductions 
of  reason ;  for  the  testimony  of  God,  and  not  the  opinions  of  men ; 
and  say  with  the  Apostle,  "As  many  as  walk  by  this  rule, 
peace  be  on  them  and  mercy,  even  upon  the  Israel  of  God.'' 


BOOK  FIRST. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  BIBLE. 

The  Bible  is  the  oldest  and  best  book  in  the  world.  It  is 
translated  into  more  languages  and  read  by  more  people  than 
any  other  volume  ever  written.  Its  history  and  its  prophecy 
comprehend  the  entire  destiny  of  the  world.  It  presents  to  us 
man  in  his  natural,  preternatural,  and  supernatural  conditions 
and  characteristics.  It  records  the  three  great  religious  ages  of  the 
world  by  developing  three  dispensations  of  religion — the  Patri- 
archal, the  Jewish,  and  the  Christian.  Man  as  he  was,  man  as  he 
is,  and  man  as  he  shall  hereafter  be,  are  its  three  grand  themes. 
It  reveals  God,  by  unfolding  the  mysterious  relations  of  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  three  great  works  of  Crea- 
tion, Providence,  and  Redemption. 

The  Bible  is  divided  into  two  great  departments,  usually,  but 
improperly,  called  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  The  former 
of  these  contains  the  inspired  writings  of  Moses,  the  first  of  his- 
torians and  the  greatest  of  lawgivers,  together  with  those  of  the 
ancient  Prophets ;  while  the  latter  contains  those  of  the  Apostles 
and  Evangelists  of  Jesus  Christ.  Regarded  as  the  Jewish  and 
the  Christian  Scriptures,  it  comprehends  sixty-six  distinct  and 
independent  treatises.  Thirty-nine  of  these  constitute  the  Jew- 
ish, and  twenty-seven  the  Christian  records.  The  Christian 
Scriptures  are  the  work  of  only  eight  persons,  six  of  whom  were 
Apostles,  and  two  of  them  Evangelists  of  Jesus  Christ  and  com- 
panions of  the  Apostles.  The  Jewish  Scriptures  were  written 
by  more  than  thirty  persons,  all  of  whom,  save  one,^  were  Jews, 

*  Job,  it  is  presumed  was  an  Idumean  or  Arabian  sage. 

23 


24  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

We  put  down  the  immediate  authors  or  writers  of  the  Bible  at 
not  less  than  forty,  as  the  lowest  number,  though  we  cannot  with 
absolute  certainty  name  them  all.  From  the  birth  of  Moses  till 
the  death  of  John  the  Apostle  is  a  period  of  full  sixteen  hundred 
and  sixty  years.  These  books  were,  therefore,  in  progress  of  com- 
pletion not  less  than  fifteen  hundred  years,  and  grasp  in  their 
historic  outlines  a  period  of  forty-one  centuries.  A  volume  of 
such  immense  compass,  exhibiting  details  of  persons,  places  and 
events  so  numerous  and  various,  and  of  such  transcendent  inter- 
est to  mankind,  seems  to  possess  claims  upon  the  attention  and 
consideration  of  every  human  being  capable  of  appreciating  its 
history,  its  biography,  its  prophecy,  its  doctrine,  or  even  its 
general  literature,  above  those  of  any  other  volume  in  the  world. 

The  Jewish  Scriptures  comprehend  history,  law,  and  pro- 
phecy. The  Jews  were  wont  to  distribute  them  into  "  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms."  The  Christian  Scriptures  pre- 
eminently consist  of  historical  and  epistolary  compositions.  Of 
all  the  Jewish  writers,  Moses,  and  of  all  the  Christian  writers, 
Paul,  is  the  largest  and  most  conspicuous.  Both  the  Jewish  and 
Christian  Scriptures  begin  with  history  and  end  with  prophecy. 
Facts  or  events,  past  and  future,  are,  therefore,  the  main  subjects 
on  which  inspired  writers  dwell.  The  historical  books  of  tho 
Old  Testament  are,  in  all,  seventeen.  The  prophetic  books  are 
also  seventeen ;  while  the  properly  didactic  and  devotional  are 
but  five.  The  first  five  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  also 
historical,  the  last  prophetical,  and  the  rest  epistolary.  These 
last  are  miscellaneous  in  their  character,  containing  sometimes 
history,  doctrine,  precepts,  and  exhortations.  The  whole  volume, 
indeed,  in  its  spirit  and  tendency,  is  devotional.  Whatever  God 
has  said  in  the  form  of  declaration,  precept,  promise,  or  threat- 
ening, is  designed  to  make  the  man  of  God  pure  and  perfect,  and 
thoroughly  accomplished  for  every  good  word  and  work. 

The  7>?a/i  of  the  Bible,  as  an  instrument  or  means  of  salvation, 
is  admirably  adapted  to  the  human  constitution  and  to  the  cir- 
cumstances which  surround  man.  The  end  to  be  obtained  is 
happiness ;  but  that  end  cannot  be  accomplished  without  sancti- 
fication  or  personal  devotion  to  God.  It  is,  indeed,  as  impossible 
for  God  to  make  any  man  happy,  without  making  him  holy,  as 
it  is  for  him  to  lie.  Now  the  Bible  is  all  arranged  with  a  supreme 
reference  to  this  fact.  And  as  piety  or  holiness  consists  in  i\ 
habit  of  life  correspondent  with  the  divine  will  and  character, 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  25 

and  is  not  natural  to  man  as  he  now  is,  it  must  be  preceded  by 
a  change  of  heart.  But  this  change  of  thg  affections  being  the 
result  of  faith  or  a  belief  of  the  testimony  of  God,  that  testimony 
for  such  a  change  must  necessarily  furnish  motives.  But  these 
motives  presuppose  gracious  acts  of  kindness  on  the  part  of  God. 
Sacred  history,  then,  records  these  acts — whether  in  the  form  of 
things  said  or  done,  commanded  or  promised  by  God.  Faith  appre^ 
hends  and  receives  this  testimony  concerning  these  facts.  These 
facts,  when  believed,  produce  corresponding  feelings  or  states  of 
mind,  sometimes  called  repentance  or  a  new  heart ;  and  this  new 
heart  leads  to  those  good  actions  denominated  piety  and  humanity, 
or  holiness  and  righteousness.  The  links  in  this  divine  chain  of 
moral  and  spiritual  instrumentality  are,  therefore,  ^"ve— facts, 
testimony ,  faith,  feeling,  action; — the  end  of  which  is  salvation. 
The  whole  revelation  of  God  is  arranged  upon  this  theory  or 
view  of  man's  constitution.  Thus  God  acts,  the  Holy  Spirit  tes- 
tifies, man  believes,  feels,  and  then  acts  according  to  the  divine 
will.  Thus  becomes  he  a  new  creature.  This  view  of  man's 
constitution  explains  why  the  Bible  is  a  volume  of  facts  histo- 
rical and  prophetical — why  it  begins  with  history  and  ends  with 
prophecy — why,  in  one  sentence,  God  works,  then  commands, 
then  promises. 

To  illustrate  this  by  the  gospel,  it  is  only  necessary  to  state 
the  order  of  things  narrated  in  the  apostolic  writings: — 1.  Jesus 
died  for  our  sins.  2.  The  Apostles  announced  this,  and  it  is 
proved  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  his  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and 
subsequent  operations.  3.  Jews  and  Gentiles  believe  these  an- 
nunciations as  reported  to  them  by  the  Apostles  and  Evange- 
lists. 4.  They  immediately  repent  of  their  sins,  and  inquire 
what  to  do.  Their  hearts  are  changed.  5.  They  then  become 
obedient  to  the  faith.     They  are  saved. 

The  plan  of  the  Bible  can  only  be  clearly  understood  when 
man's  condition  and  constitution  are  clearly  and  fully  appre- 
hended. For,  in  truth,  the  Bible  is  a  glorious  system  of  grace — 
an  absolutely  complete  and  perfect  adaptation  of  spiritual  means 
to  a  great  and  glorious  end.  This,,  however,  is  not  the  only 
grand  comprehensive  view  of  the  volume  of  God's  inspiration 
which  we  desire  to  lay  before  the  reader.  We  wish  to  look  into 
the  mechanism  of  this  sublime  instrument  of  renovation  and  sal* 
ration. 

Jesus  Christ  is  the  centre  of  the  whole  evangelical  system.  He 

3 


26  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

is  "  the  Root  and  the  oflfspring  of  David'' — "  the  Sun  of  Righfc- 

eousness" — "the  bright  and  the  Morning  Star" — "  the  Alpha 
and  the  Omega"  of  the  volume.  "  The  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the 
spirit"  of  all  sacred  history  and  of  all  divine  prophecy.  Now 
the  history  of  the  Bible  is  very  rationally  or  philosophically  ar- 
ranged, both  in  its  prospective  and  retrospective  character,  with 
a  single  and  sublime  reference  to  Jesus  Christ.  Let  us  ana^ 
lyze  it. 

The  first  promise  to  fallen  man  respects  a  Messiah — in  these 
words:  "  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee,"  0  Serpent,  "  and  the 
woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed.     He  shall  bruise 

THY  HEAD,  AND  THOU  SHALT  BRUISE  HIS  HEEL."      The  wholo  Bible 

but  demonstrates,  illustrates,  and  applies  this  grand  promise. 
Eve's  son  of  blessings  is  now  to  be  elicited  out  of  the  human 
race ;  and  just  so  much  of  the  history  of  the  human  race  as  is  neces- 
sary to  his  identification,  development,  and  glorification  is  given, 
and  no  more.  Let  the  reader  take  this  lamp  in  his  hand,  read 
all  the  historical  books  of  both  Testaments,  note  every  fact,  inci- 
dent, and  document  therein  found,  and  see  if  they  do  not  arrange 
themselves  in  a  proper  position,  either  to  identify,  develope,  or 
glorify  this  benefactor  of  our  race.  We  shall  glance  at  Genesis 
for  an  illustration. 

The  single  book  of  Genesis  contains  the  only  information  we 
have  of  the  human  race  for  the  long  period  of  two  thousand  three 
hundred  sixty  and  eight  years.  It  begins  with  creation  and 
ends  with  the  death  of  the  patriarch  Joseph.  The  other  books 
of  Moses  bring  us  down  to  the  year  of  the  world  2553.  All  this 
history  antedates  any  authentic  records  of  the  human  race  now 
extant  in  any  nation  or  language. 

But  the  portions  of  Genesis  assigned  to  the  diiferent  epocha 
of  human  history  are  most  singularly  and  significantly  dispro- 
portionate. Why  is  it  that  eight-fiftieths,  or  eight  chapters  of 
fifty,  are  devoted  to  the  history  of  creation  and  of  the  flood,  and 
to  the  religious  and  political  conditions  of  the  human  family,  for 
the  long  period  of  one  thousand  six  hundred  and  fifty-six  years; 
while  the  single  history  of  one  Abraham  occupies  thirteen-fiffcif 
eths,  and  that  of  his  descendants,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and  Joseph, 
twenty-four  fiftieths  ! — ?  Indeed,  the  foi-tunes  of  this  Joseph 
occupy  a  larger  space  than  that  assigned  to  the  first  two  thou- 
sand years  of  the  world.  This  great  disproportion  in  the  details 
of  things  can  be  satisfactorily  explained  only  in  one  way.    That 


ANTECEDENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  27 

apprehended,  and  the  plan  and  structure  of  the  inspired  writings 
can  be  properly  understood  and  appreciated. 

**  The  testimony  of  Jesus,"  says  a  divine  oracle,  "  is  the  spirit 
of  prophecy."  It  is,  I  presume,  as  truly  the  spirit  of  sacred  his- 
tory.— Jesus  is  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega  of  the  Bible,  because 
the  Bible  is  the  history  of  redemption.  Every  thing  takes  pre- 
cedence, occupies  space,  and  engages  attention  in  the  direct  ratio 
of  its  bearings  upon  the  development  and  consummation  of  human 
redemption.  Take,  for  example,  the  antediluvian  age :  from  the 
moment  the  gracious  intimation  that  the  woman's  offspring  would 
one  day  "  bruise  the  serpent's  head"  is  given,  its  development 
becomes  the  all-engrossing  theme  both  of  history  and  of  pro- 
phecy. Persons,  places,  and  events  occupy  a  prominence  and 
conspicuity  as  they  happen  to  be  connected  with  that  grand 
central  idea  of  the  whole  Bible.  The  altar,  the  victim,  and  the 
priest  appear  in  the  history  of  Cain  and  Abel ;  while  blood  and 
faith  triumph  in  Abel's  martyrdom.  Cain's  history,  so  far  as 
it  is  given,  is  but  the  shade  in  the  picture,  and  a  few  samples 
of  his  descendants  illustrate  the  whole  history  of  men  in  the 
flesh.  He  founded  a  city,  and  called  it  after  the  name  of  his 
son  Enoch.  From  Enoch  descended  the  sons  and  daughters  of 
men.  Polygamy  was  the  consummation  of  his  principles  in  the 
fifth  generation.  His  offspring  were  brass  and  iron  manufac- 
turers, and  the  first  that  invented  portable  houses,  instruments 
of  music,  and  that  handled  the  harp  and  the  organ.  Tu-bal- 
cain,  or  Vulcan,  and  his  sister  Naamah,  inventor  of  the  distaff 
and  the  spindle,  are  amongst  his  renowned  issue.  Not  one 
saint  is  named  in  the  whole  posterity  of  Cain,  the  first-born  of 
woman  and  the  prototype  of  religious  persecutors. 

The  history  of  Cain  and  Abel  being  given,  because  of  its  con- 
nection with  the  altar  and  the  sacrifice,  the  historian,  prompted 
by  the  Spirit  of  revelation,  opens  the  illustrious  lineage  of  the 
promised  seed  of  woman ;  and  that  becomes,  from  this  moment, 
the  backbone  of  the  whole  Bible — the  grand  meridian  line  of  all 
divine  history  and  prophecy. — Seth  is  born  to  fill  the  place  of 
Abel,  and  his  progeny  is  counted,  one  by  one,  down  to  Jesus  of 
Bethlehem  and  of  Nazareth.  Thus  the  patriarchal  chain  of  Mes- 
siah's ancestors  down  to  the  Flood  are  Adam,  Seth,  Enos, 
Cainan,  Mehalaleel,  Jared,  Enoch,  Methuselah,  Lamech,  Noah. 
From  the  Fall  of  Man  to  the  Flood,  all  that  is  transmitted  to  us 
of  human  affairs  or  of  divine  providence  connects  itself  with 


f8  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

the^e  ten  patriarchs.  After  the  Flood,  Noah's  three  sons  engross 
our  attention.  Their  connection  with  all  the  ancient  nations  of 
the  earth  is  briefly  but  most  interestingly  sketched.  But  so  soon 
as  reasons  are  given  in  the  history  of  Shem,  of  Ham,  and 
Japheth,  for  a  special  providence  in  dispersing  them  over  the 
whole  earth,  and  in  selecting  the  younger  of  these  three  to  stand 
at  the  head  of  the  postdiluvian  line  of  the  child  of  promise,  the 
historian  confines  himself  to  the  royal  and  sacerdotal  line  of  the 
Messiah.  Ho  next  counts  off  ten  other  progenitors  of  our  Lord. 
These  are  Shem,  Arphaxad,  Salah,  Eber,  Peleg,  Keu,  Serug^ 
Nahor,  Terah,  Abraham.  The  promise  given  to  Eve  and  re- 
peated to  Shem,  is  still  further  developed  and  committed  to 
Abraham.  To  the  end  of  Genesis  we  have  five  other  noble  links 
in  this  patriarchal  chain.  These  are  Isaac,  Jacob,  Judah, 
Phares,  and  Ezrom.  Genesis  then  gives  us  in  all  five-and-twenty 
of  our  Lord's  ancestors,  and  just  so  much  of  human  affairs  as  ia 
necessary  to  their  favourable  introduction  to  our  notice.  Joseph's 
history,  so  pre-eminently  connected  with  the  whole  drama  of 
man's  redemption,  and  terminating  in  the  migration  and  settle- 
ment of  the  symbolic  nation  in  Egypt,  is  more  minutely  and  par- 
ticularly detailed  than  any  one  individual  history  in  the  five 
books  of  Moses.  His  other  books,  occupying  but  forty  years' 
incidents,  add  no  new  names  to  the  illustrious  line.  After  the 
books  of  Joshua  and  of  Judges,  the  book  of  Ruth  is  inserted  to 
connect  Judah  and  the  promise  made  to  him  with  David  through 
Boaz,  Obed,  and  Jesse — making  the  line  from  Ezrom  to  succeed 
thus  : — Aram,  Aminadab,  Naashon,  Salmon,  Boaz,  Obed,  Jesse, 
David. 

The  beautiful  story  of  Ruth,  the  Moabitish  saint,  inserted  for 
the  express  purpose  of  connecting  David  with  Judah,  Abraham, 
and  Seth,  and  of  completing  through  him  the  illustrious  line 
down  to  the  Virgin's  Son,  is  itself  a  demonstration  of  the  truth 
of  our  assumption,  viz.,  that  the  plan  of  the  Bible  is  to  reveal 
God  to  man  and  man  to  himself,  by  placing  one  fiimily  under  a 
special  providence,  and  in  making  all  its  fortunes  first  the  sub- 
ject of  prophecy,  and  then  of  history,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  world.*  God  meant  more  than  any  man  has  yet  com- 
prehended when  he  said,  "  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God 
of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob.     This  is  my  name  for  ever  and 

*  See  Ruth,  chapter  iv.  18-22. 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  2S^' 

wy  memorial  to  all  generations."  The  history  of  that  family  is, 
then,  a  documentary  revelation  of  the  attributes  of  God,  and 
especially  of  his  truthfulness  and  covenant-keeping  character ; 
■while  all  other  histories  of  all  other  families  serve  as  night  to 
day  in  the  contrast,  to  present  his  people  in  all  the  most  favour- 
able attitudes  before  us,  and  to  induce  all  men  to  place  them- 
selves under  the  wings  of  his  almighty  protection. 

Soon  as  David  ascends  the  throne  and  his  family  obtains  the 
sceptre  of  the  twelve  tribes,  the  royal  lineage  is  in  safe-keeping. 
The  books  of  Samuel,  the  Kings,  and  the  Chronicles,  down  to 
the  end  of  Old  Testament  history,  not  only  faithfully  preserve 
the  records  of  the  nation,  but  afford  a  thousand  developments 
of  human  nature  and  of  divine  providence,  full  of  instruction  to 
all  mankind  in  all  ages  of  the  world. 

Matthew  and  Luke  open  the  New  Testament  history  by  giving 
from  the  archives  of  the  nation  and  the  rolls  of  lineage  the  an- 
cestry of  Jesus  up  to  Adam ; — the  former,  by  his  legal  father, 
Joseph  ;  the  latter,  by  his  natural  mother,  Mary.  By  the  legal 
paternal  line  he  is  the  sixtieth  in  descent  from  Adam ;  while  by 
the  maternal  line  he  is  the  seventy-sixth.  The  apostolic  writings 
give  the  history  of  the  Jews  down  to  the  crucifixion  of  their  pro- 
mised Deliverer,  the  repudiation  of  them  as  the  nation  and  peo- 
ple of  God,  and  the  adoption  of  believing  Jews  and  Gentiles,  as 
one  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  their  stead ;  while  the  prophecies  of  the 
New  Testament  indicate  the  destiny  of  Israel  according  to  the 
flesh,  as  well  as  Israel  according  to  the  spirit,  till  the  final  consum- 
mation.   Such  is  the  plan  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Scriptures. 

From  the  plan  of  the  Bible,  as  well  as  from  its  philosophy,  its 
claims  upon  the  faith  and  admiration  of  mankind  may  be  strongly 
argued.  Its  philosophy  is.  That  without  piety  no  man  can  be 
happy;  and  that  with  it,  any  man  in  any  outward  circumstances 
may  be  happy  to  the  full  extent  of  his  capacity  for  human  enjoy- 
ment. But  human  enjoyment  is  neither  animal  nor  angelic  en- 
joyment. Animal  or  sensitive  enjoyments  are  supreme  and  ex- 
clusive in  the  brutal  creation,  but  subordinate  in  man.  Intel- 
lectual pleasures  are  necessarily  dependent  upon  the  ministry 
which  the  intellect  performs.  If  the  intellect  is  made  subordi- 
nate to  the  animal  instincts,  passions,  or  propensities  ;  or  if  the 
intellect  is  subordinate  to  moral  and  spiritual  enjoyments,  its 
pleasures  are  essentially  different.  In  the  former  case  they  are 
but  refined  animalism;  in  the  latter  case  they  are  spiritual  and 


B(y  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

divine.  In  this  view  all  human  enjoyments  are  reduced  to  two 
classes :  the  one  is  spiritual,  and  the  other  carnal ;  the  one  is 
moral,  social,  and  refined;  the  other  is  selfish,  exclusive,  and 
gross ;  the  one  rises,  the  other  sinks  to  all  eternity. 

The  philosophy  of  the  Bible  is,  therefore,  the  philosophy  of 
human  happiness,  and  the  only  philosophy  which  commends 
itself  to  the  cultivated  understanding  of  man.  No  mere  rational- 
ist, philosopher,  or  sage,  ever  proposed  such  a  view  of  happiness 
to  man.  It  is  peculiar  to  the  Bible.  It  is  an  original  and  divine 
conception,  and  proves  the  divine  authorship  of  the  book.  From 
the  object  and  character  of  the  book  of  revelation,  its  divine 
authority  can  be  most  triumphantly  argued.  It  is  a  book  ecjually 
worthy  of  God  to  bestow,  and  of  man  to  receive.  Dictated  by 
infinite  benevolence,  characterized  by  supreme  intelligence,  and 
perfectly  adapted  to  the  genius  of  human  nature,  it  is  worthy 
of  universal  reception  and  of  the  most  profound  and  grateful 
homage. 

Its  plan  is  superhuman  and  divine.  No  one  class  of  men 
of  any  one  age  could  have  formed  such  a  plan  as  that  of  writing 
the  history  of  one  family  for  seven  thousand  years,  and  of  incor- 
porating with  that  history  a  scheme  of  eternal  redemption  from 
sin.  And  yet  it  is  as  clear  as  the  sun  in  a  cloudless  sky,  that 
Moses,  Joshua,  Samuel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah — ^with  all  the  Jewish 
historians,  prophets,  and  poets,  during  a  period  of  fifteen  hun- 
dred years,  were,  without  concert,  conference,  or  voluntary  co- 
operation, prosecuting  just  such  an  object  without  seeming  to 
comprehend  it.  And  not  they  only,  but  all  the  patriarchs  before 
Moses,  all  the  renowned  fathers  of  mankind  from  Adam  to  Moses, 
were  orally  transmitting  such  information  to  their  descendants ; 
and  all  tlie  scribes  of  the  Jews,  from  Malachi  to  Matthew,  were 
in  their  chronicles  of  Jewish  times  recording  such  incidents  and 
events  as  make  out  the  entire  history  of  the  family  of  Jesus 
Christ  from  Adam  to  Joseph,  his  legal  father,  and  to  Mary,  his 
natural  mother.  This  was  done  but  once  in  all  time,  and  for  a 
purpose  just  as  peculiar  and  singular  as  the  Bible  itself. 

A  skeptic  or  an  infidel  might  as  well  argue  that  king  Hiram's 
thirty  thousand  woodsmen  and  builders,  and  king  Solomon's  one 
hundred  and  fifty  thousand  hewers,  stone-cutters,  and  carriers 
of  burdens,  with  his  three  thousand  three  hundred  supervisors 
and  directors  were  severally  and  individually  working  each  one 
after  a  plan  of  his  own ;  and  that  without  concert  or  prc-iu-range- 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  81 

ment,  all  their  materials  were  fitted  up  into  a  temple  the  most 
splendid  and  magnificent  that  ever  stood  upon  this  earth — the 
•wonder  of  the  world  and  the  glory  of  architecture, — as  that  shep- 
herds, husbandmen,  fishermen,  artisans,  historians,  lawgivers, 
kings,  living  in  different  countries,  in  ages  very  remote,  speaking 
diverse  languages,  and  of  every  peculiarity  of  character,  could 
have,  either  by  accident  or  design,  got  up  such  a  volume  as  the 
Bible,  marked  in  every  page  by  a  peculiar  originality  of  charac- 
ter, a  most  striking  unity  of  design,  pervading  an  almost  infinite 
variety  of  circumstantial  details,  and  in  a  style  the  most  simple, 
artless,  and  sublime.  The  fortuitous  concourse  of  atoms  into  a 
universe,  indicative  of  designs  and  adaptations  as  innumerable 
as  the  stars,  as  countless  as  the  sands  of  the  sea,  would  be  a 
rational  hypothesis,  a  plausible  and  credible  theory,  compared 
with  such  an  assumption. 

The  divine  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is,  indeed,  fully 
proved  by  the  divine  wisdom  and  knowledge  contained  in  the 
record  itself. — The  author  is  known  in  his  works.  God's  book 
is  full  of  divinity.  It  reveals  what  human  wisdom  cannot  fathom, 
but  what  human  wisdom  must  believe  and  approve.  God  has 
not  only  affixed  his  sign  manual  to  the  mission  of  Apostles  and 
Prophets  in  the  miracles  which  they  vrrought,  and  in  the  pro- 
phecies which  they  uttered ;  but  he  has  stamped  upon  the  trea- 
sures of  wisdom  and  knowledge  which  it  contains,  and  incorpo- 
rated with  all  its  gracious  and  sublime  developments,  its  holy 
doctrine,  its  heavenly  spirit,  and  its  divine  precepts,  the  indubi- 
table indications  of  its  superhuman,  supernatural,  and  divine 
origin.  But  we  shall,  for  the  present,  only  attempt  to  prove  its 
divine  origin  by  the  indirect  method  of  reducing  to  an  absurdity 
a  contrary  hypothesis. — Paul  is  my  example  and  my  authority 
for  an  occasional  assault  upon  the  fortress  of  error  by  showing 
what  will  result  from  its  admission  to  be  truth,  or,  which  is  the 
same  thing  in  other  words,  by  assuming  the  truth  to  be  a  lie. 
He  says,  "If  there  be  no  resurrection  of  the  dead,  then  is  not 
Christ  raised.  If  Christ  be  not  raised,  then  all  men  are  in  their 
sins — preaching  is  useless,  faith  is  vain ;  we  Apostles  are  all 
liars,  and  all  that  have  died  in  attestation  of  it  have  volunta- 
rily destroyed  themselves."  So  let  us  reason  in  this  case,  in  as 
few  words  as  those  found  in  that  admirable  argument  in  proof 
of  the  resurrection.  We  assume  that  the  gospel  is  true  or  not 
true.     If  it  is  true,  it  ought  to  be  obeyed ;  if  it  is  not  true,  it 


82  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

ought  to  be  disproved  and  repudiated.  All  the  world  so  far 
agrees  with  our  postulata.  Well,  now,  say  it  is  not  true ;  in 
other  words,  it  is  a  falsehood — a  lie.     What  then  ? 

Ist.  There  is  not  a  credible  history  in  the  wo7'ld ;  because  no  his- 
tory possesses  so  great  a  number  or  variety  of  the  attributes 
of  truth  or  reasons  of  faith  as  the  gospel  history.  The  original 
witnesses  were  plain,  common-sense,  ordinary,  matter-of-fact 
men.  They  were  eye-witnesses  and  ear-witnesses  of  the  facts 
which  they  attest.  Their  occupations  of  life  were  favourable  to 
having  good  eyes  and  good  ears.  They  were  chiefly  fishermen. 
The  facts  which  they  relate,  and  which  constitute  the  gospel, 
were  sensible  facts — subjected  not  to  one  sense,  but  to  several 
senses.  So  speaks  one  of  them: — "  That  which  we  have  heardy 
which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  have  looked  upon, 
and  our  hands  have  handled  of  the  word  of  life,  declare  we  unto 
you."*  They  had  nothing  to  gain,  but  every  thing  temporal 
and  fleshly  to  lose  by  the  proclamation  of  these  facts.  They  made 
themselves,  "  of  all  men  the  most  miserable.''  Their  life,  if  their 
doctrine  be  not  true,  is  more  marvellous  than  their  doctrine:  no 
men  ever  gave  stronger  evidence  of  truthfulness  than  they.  If 
they  cannot  be  believed,  no  historian  can.  Tliere  is,  then,  no 
credible  history  in  the  world. 

2d.  In  the  second  place.  There  is  no  sincerity  in  maHyrdom. 
It  is  an  indisputable  fact  that  the  Messiah  and  most  of  the  Apos- 
tles were  martyrs.  They  died  for  what  they  said,  and  not  for 
what  they  did. — Mankind  in  all  ages  concur  in  the  opinion  that 
the  strongest  proof  of  any  man's  honesty  or  sincerity  is  his 
dying  voluntarily  in  attestation  of  the  truth  of  what  he  affirms. 
We  allege  that  martyrdom  does  not  prove  the  truth  of  a  man's 
opinions,  but  only  that  he  sincerely  believes  them.  Sincerity  is 
no  test  of  truth  in  any  matter  of  theory  or  speculation.  But  in 
all  matters  of  sensible  facts  tested  by  the  senses,  seen  or  heard 
by  many  persons  and  on  many  occasions,  sincerity  in  the  avowal 
of  them  is  proof  of  the  certainty  of  them.  Now  as  martyrdom 
proves  sincerity,  and  sincerity  on  the  part  of  witnesses  of  sensible 
facts  proves  the  facts — the  gospel,  being  founded  on  sensible  facts, 
seen  often,  and  seen  by  many,  is  true,  or  there  is  no  sincerity  in 
martyrdom. 

3d.  If  the  gospel  facts  are  false,  then  learning  and  talent  are 

*  John,  1  Ep.  chap.  i.  verso  1. 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  33 

of  no  value.  The  value  of  talent  and  learning  consists  in  the 
power  they  impart  to  their  possessor  to  acquire  and  communi- 
cate truth.  Now  it  needs  not  to  be  proved,  that  innumerable 
multitudes  of  the  most  talented  and  learned  men  in  all  the  ages 
of  Christianity  from  its  first  promulgation  till  now,  have  been 
enrolled  amongst  the  friends  and  advocates  of  the  Bible.  Nay, 
indeed,  in  all  ages  the  literature  and  science  of  Christendom 
have  been  on  the  side  of  the  Bible,  and  mainly  employed  in  its 
service.  If,  then,  the  Bible  be  not  true,  learning  and  talent 
neither  protect  us  from  error,  nor  assist  us  in  the  acquisition 
of  truth ! 

4th.  But  again.  On  the  admission  that  the  gospel  is  not  true, 
there  is  no  connection  between  goodness  and  tmtJi — no  excellency  in 
truth.  The  best  men  in  the  world  have  always  been  those  that 
believed  in  the  Bible.  The  most  humane,  benevolent,  public- 
spirited,  philanthropic,  and  virtuous  men  that  ever  lived,  whose 
virtuous  examples  have  been  an  honour  to  human  nature,  have 
been  believers  in  the  truth  of  the  Bible.  Now  if  the  Bible  be  a 
cunningly  devised  fable,  then  there  is  no  necessary  connection 
between  truth  and  moral  excellence,  any  more  than  betweeen 
error  and  virtue.     There  is,  then,  no  excellency  in  truth. 

5th.  Still  farther,  If  the  Bible  be  not  true,  falsehood,  impos- 
ture, and  error  are  better  than  truth.  The  reason  is  obvious — the 
Bible  is  either  true  or  false.  If  false,  those  who  believe  it  be- 
lieve a  lie.  But  that  lie  has  done  more  to  civilize,  refine,  purify, 
and  adorn  human  nature,  than  all  the  atheism,  infidelity,  and 
philosophy  of  Egypt,  Chaldea,  Greece  and  Rome.  Surely,  then, 
the  Christian  lie  is  better  than  all  the  philosophic  truth  of  all 
ages  and  all  nations.  Hence  we  infer  that  if  the  Bible  be  false, 
error  and  fraud  work  better  for  mankind  than  honesty  and 
truth. 

6th.  But  again — If  the  Bible  be  false,  as  all  who  reject  it 
affirm,  then  there  is  no  reason  in  the  universe;  or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  creation  is  a  maze  withoid  a  plan,  and  nature  works 
in  vain.  We  must  judge  of  the  unknown  by  the  known.  Now 
the  fortunes  of  our  planet  are  our  data  for  the  fortunes  of  all 
other  planets.  The  fortunes  of  its  inhabitants  are,  so  far  as 
nature  or  reason  is  our  guide,  the  fortunes  of  the  inhabitants 
of  all  other  planets.  Amongst  earth's  inhabitants  there  is  one 
class  of  beings  for  whose  creation  and  comfort  all  others  do 
exist.    Man  is  the  name  of  that  class  of  beings.    He  is  the  end 


34  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

of  this  terrestrial  creation.  If  he  be  lost — ^for  ever  lost,  all  is 
lost.  Crops  of  vegetables  annually  spring  out  of  the  earth,  and 
return  to  it  again. — Races  of  animals  feed  upon  them,  and  die. 
They,  like  their  food,  but  enrich  the  earth.  Day  and  night  suc- 
ceed each  other.  Years  revolve.  The  earth  turns  upon  its 
axis,  wheels  around  its  orbit,  feeds  and  buries  all  its  tenantry. 
Man  himself  and  his  food  alike  perish  for  ever. 

Now  what  is  gained  by  the  whole  operation  ?  If  man  lives 
not  again — if  the  Bible  be  not  true,  nature  labours  in  vain :  and 
if  there  be  a  Creator,  he  works  without  a  plan,  and  toils  for  no 
purpose.  Nature  is  an  abortion,  and  the  whole  machinery  of  the 
universe  a  splendid  failure.  There  is  no  reason  for  creation — 
for  nature  ;  and  there  is  no  reason  in  either.  If,  then,  the  Bible 
be  not  true — if  the  history  it  gives  of  man,  his  creation,  his  fall, 
his  recovery,  be  not  true — in  one  word,  if  the  gospel  be  a  lie  and 
the  Bible  false,  no  living  man  can  give  one  good  reason  for  the 
existence  of  our  planet,  or  that  of  any  sun  or  system  in  that 
collation  of  worlds  and  systems  which  compose  this  mysterious 
and  sublime  universe. 

But  if  the  Bible  be  not  true,  it  is  not  enough  to  say — 1st.  That 
there  is  not  a  credible  history  in  the  world.  2d.  That  there  is 
no  sincerity  in  martyrdom.  3d.  That  human  learning  and 
talent  are  of  no  value.  4th.  That  there  is  no  excellency  in  truth. 
5th.  That  falsehood,  imposition,  and  error,  are  better  than  truth. 
And  6th.  That  there  is  no  reason  in  the  universe ;  but  we  must 
also  add,  that  there  is  no  God  ! 

Nature  ends  in  ruin — the  world  is  full  of  sin  and  misery — 
there  is  no  reason  for  any  thing — man  lives  for  no  purpose — no 
kind  intimation  has  been  given  him  of  any  great  and  good  first 
CAUSE ;  which  is  but  equivalent  to  saying  there  is  no  good  being 
above  man — no  one  of  almighty  power,  who  could  speak  to  him, 
enlighten  him,  or  comfort  him,  touching  his  origin,  his  nature,  his 
relations,  his  obligations,  or  his  destiny  ;  and  that  is  equivalent  to 
saying  that  there  is  no  supremely  Good  One,  no  Creator,  or  Pro- 
prietor of  man.  For  who  can  imagine  a  supreme  intelligence,  of  al- 
mighty power  and  of  infinite  benevolence — who  made  man  and  in- 
spired him  with  such  desires  after  the  knowledge  of  himself — with 
sucli  longings  after  happiness  perfect  and  complete — and  who  has 
himself  the  faculty  of  speech,  the  power  of  communicating  the 
knowledge  of  himself  to  man  ;  and  yet  has  never  spoken  to  him, 
never  enlightened  him  on  the  only  point  vital  to  all  his  interests. 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  '35 

his  eternal  destiny ;  and  compared  with  which  all  other  enjoy- 
ments possible  to  man  as  he  now  is,  are  not  in  the  proportion 
of  an  atom  to  a  universe,  or  a  moment  to  a  boundless  eternity! 
Such  an  hypothesis  is  at  war  with  every  oracle  of  reason,  with 
every  decision  of  common  sense,  and  with  all  the  analogies  of  the 
universe.  It  cannot  be:  it  is  impossible.  There  is  a  God — 
,  there  is  a  Book  of  God — ^there  is  truth  in  history — there  is  sin- 
cerity in  martyrdom — there  is  value  in  talent  and  learning — there 
is  an  excellency  in  truth — truth  is  better  than  error,  falsehood, 
and  imposture — and  there  is  reason  in  the  universe,  and  a  glo- 
rious destiny  for  man. 

The  Bible  has  been  proved  to  be  a  divine  revelation  as  many 
millions  of  times  as  there  are  individuals  who  have  believed  it 
to  the  salvation  of  their  souls.  But  it  never  has  been  proved  to 
be  false  to  a  single  individual  of  the  human  race.  Nor  can  it 
ever  be  so  proved.  No  man  who  understands  what  he  says, 
can  in  truth  affirm  that  he  believes  it  to  be  false.  Who  can  be- 
lieve any  thing  to  be  false  without  oral  or  written  testimony  ? 
But  no  living  man  has  either  oral  or  written  testimony  contra- 
dicting the  testimony  of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets :  therefore, 
in  the  absence  of  such  testimony,  he  can  no  more  believe  it  to 
"be  false  than  a  blind  man  can  see  the  sun.  A  man  may  doubt 
whether  it  be  true ;  but  to  believe  it  to  be  false,  or  to  be  assured 
that  it  is  not  true,  is  altogether  impossible. 

Some  persons  object  to  the  BilDle — because,  as  they  say,  its 
divine  inspiration  is  yet  a  subject  of  debate.  Such  thinkers  and 
reasoners  are  grossly  defective  in  reason  and  education.  Did 
ever  any  one  hear  of  any  thing  that  has  been  proved  to  all  the 
world  ?  Is  there  a  single  historic  fact  that  is  believed  by  every 
human  being  ?  If  there  be  not  one,  then  every  historic  fact  is 
yet  in  debate.  But  shall  we  say  that  no  proposition  is  proved, 
because  it  is  not  proved  to  the  whole  world !  The  gospel  will 
never  be  out  of  debate  while  there  is  one  infidel  or  skeptic  in  the 
world.  This  is,  however,  no  more  a  disparagement  of  its  truth, 
or  its  claims  upon  all  mankind,  than  it  is  an  argument  against 
any  proposition,  fact,  or  testimony,  that  all  the  world  has  not  yet 
acquiesced  in  its  truth. 

We  cannot  believe  by  proxy,  as  nations,  as  empires,  or  as 
worlds.  We  must  each  one  believe  for  himself.  Hence  the 
evidence  must  be  considered,  understood,  and  appreciated  by 
every  individual  for  himself.    But  the  fact  that  millions  of  aU 


S6  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

orders  of  mind,  the  greatest  and  most  gifted  of  our  race,  have 
believed  it  to  be  true — multitudes  of  them  even  to  martyrdom 
for  its  sake ;  and  that  not  one  individual  can  believe  it  to  be 
false,  is  a  consideration  that  ought  to  silence  every  modest  in- 
quirer, and,  were  it  possible,  cover  with  shame  those  reckless 
and  senseless  dogmatists  who  declaim  against  a  book  of  whose 
contents  and  whose  history  they  truly  comprehend  nothing,  be- 
cause it  is  yet  in  debate.  On  their  showing,  there  is  nothing 
credible  or  worthy  of  universal  acceptance,  because  there  is 
nothing  that  is  not  a  matter  of  doubt  or  disbelief  with  some 
person.  But  we  argue  not  the  question  of  the  Bible's  truth 
with  such  opponents.  We  have  not  given  a  tithe  of  the  topics 
from  which  its  truth  is  irrefragably  argued.  Enough,  it  is  pre- 
sumed, to  convince  the  candid  whose  minds  can  discern  the 
force  of  argument,  is  contained  in  the  preceding  hints  and 
reflections. 

Christianity  has  stood  erect  in  the  midst  of  all  sorts  of  adver- 
saries— Jews,  Pagans,  Turks,  Infidels,  &c. ;  and,  like  the  pillars 
of  Hercules,  the  rock  of  Gibraltar,  or  the  everlasting  mountains, 
bids  defiance  to  all  the  billows  of  the  ocean,  and  to  all  the  tem- 
pests of  Satan,  to  shake  it  from  its  immovable  basis. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    BIBLE. 


That  the  Bible  contains  a  revelation  from  God,  is  susceptible 
of  every  variety  and  degree  of  evidence  which  guides  men  in  the 
afi'airs  of  this  life.  We  have  no  species  of  moral  evidence  that 
afibrds  to  mankind  a  higher  degree  of  assurance  than  that  on 
which  Prophets  and  Apostles  demand  our  unwavering  confi- 
dence. If  we  admit  that  there  is  truth  in  history,  sincerity  in 
martyrdom,  value  in  learning,  advantage  in  talent,  excellency 
in  truth,  reason  in  the  universe,  or  a  Creator  in  the  heavens ; 
then  must  we  admit  that  the  Bible  is  inspired  by  infinite  wis- 
dom, and  presented  to  man  by  his  Almighty  Father  and  Bene- 
factor. But  as  we  have  given  a  specimen  of  the  indirect  evi- 
dence in  proof  of  its  divine  authorship  in  our  first  chapter,  we 


^  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  37 

ishall  now  exhibit  a  sample  or  two  of  the  direct  proof  which  it 
offers  in  support  of  its  claims  upon  the  assent  of  our  understand- 
ing and  the  consent  of  our  hearts. 

The  grand  climax  of  moral  evidence  consists  in  the  possibility, 
the  probability,  and  absolute  certainty  of  any  fact,  event,  or 
proposition.  When  we  can  show  that  the  fact  presented  in  any 
proposition  is  possible,  that  it  is  probable,  that  it  is  absolutely 
certain,  we  have  gone  through  all  the  forms  of  argument  upon 
which  the  truth  of  any  proposition  is  admitted.  Beyond  these, 
reason  asks  no  more,  because  she  can  give  no  more.  True, 
the  last  implies  the  former  two ;  yet  there  is  an  advantage  to 
most  minds  in  ascending,  step  by  step,  to  any  commanding 
eminence. 

Now  the  grand  proposition  is,  that  God  has  spoken  to  man  in 
the  Bible.  That  it  is  possible  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  God 
thunders  in  the  clouds,  murmurs  in  the  tempests,  whispers  in 
the  breeze.  Still  more  evident  from  the  fact,  that  he  has  taught 
the  lion  to  roar  for  his  prey,  the  beasts  of  the  forest  to  com- 
mune with  their  companions,  and  the  birds  of  the  air  to  soothe 
the  human  ear  with  their  melodies.  But  most  evident  from  the 
fact,  that  he  has  given  to  man  a  tongue  to  speak,  and  an  ear  to 
listen  to  the  voice  of  his  brother.  The  inference,  then,  is,  that 
God  possesses  the  power  which  he  has  imparted  to  man  ;  that 
he  who  taught  man  to  reveal  his  mind  and  will  to  his  compa- 
nions, and  even  to  some  domestic  animals  that  wait  upon  his 
word,  has  the  power  to  reveal  his  own  mind  and  will  to  his 
creature  man. 

But  we  advance  a  step  farther,  and  assume  that  it  is  probable 
that  God  has  spoken  to  man.  This  we  argue  from  the  fact  that 
God  can  speak,  that  man  desires  to  hear  him  speak,  and  that 
he  has  created  no  rational  desire  in  man  for  which  he  has  not 
made  a  proper  provision,  either  in  himself  or  in  his  works.  I 
need  not  ask  the  question,  as  if  any  one  doubted  it,  whether 
there  is  any  desire  in  man  comparable  to  any  desire  of  life  ? 
Nor  need  I  attempt  to  prove  to  any  one,  that  of  all  knowledge 
imaginable  there  is  none  so  desirable  to  man  as  the  knowledge 
of  his  own  origin  and  of  his  ultimate  destiny.  Now,  as  God 
has  created  these  desires,  and  he  is  supremely  kind  and  bounti- 
ful in  all  his  original  creations,  and  in  his  constant  providence 
for  all  the  reasonable  and  lawful  wants  of  man,  is  it  not  pro- 


38  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

"bable  that  at  some  time  or  other  he  has  made  a  verbal  or  oral 
revelation  of  himself  in  some  way  intelligible  to  man  ? 

But  in  the  second  place,  I  argue  the  probability  that  God  has 
spoken  to  man  from  the  indisputable  fact,  that  man  himself 
speaks-  Some,  I  know,  assume  that  language  is  natural  to 
man,  because  he  has  organs  of  pronunciation ;  but  in  good 
sense,  and  in  good  logic,  one  might  as  reasonably  argue  that 
Greek  or  Hebrew  is  natural  to  man,  because  he  has  the  power 
of  understanding  or  of  pronouncing  those  languages.  But  who 
ever  spoke  a  language  that  he  did  not  first  learn  from  another  ? 
We  all  have  our  vernacular — our  mother  tongue.  We  could  as 
easily  conceive  of  one  born  without  a  mother,  as  of  one  speak- 
ing Greek  that  did  not  first  hear  it.  But  as  there  certainly  was 
one  man  who  never  had  a  mother,  or  a  father,  that  man  could 
have  no  mother  tongue — no  vernacular.  God,  then,  must  have 
taught  man  to  speak  viva  voce;  inasmuch  as  language  is  only 
an  imitation  of  distinct  intelligible  sounds  ;  and  as  all  language 
comes  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  another,  {for 
the  deaf  have  no  words,  though  they  have  organs  of  pronunciation,) 
we  must,  in  all  reason,  conclude  that  the  first  human  speaker 
had  heard  God  himself  speak. 

So  Moses,  in  accordance  with  our  reasoning,  teaches  that  God 
talked  with  Adam,  and  first  gave  names  to  things.  Moses  also 
informs  us  that  he  left  one  class  of  objects  for  Adam  to  name, 
and  that  "  whatever  Adam  called  every  living  creature,  that 
became  the  name  of  it." 

No  class  of  linguists,  rhetoricians,  or  philosophers,  has  ever 
been  able  to  explain  the  origin  of  language  on  the  principles  ol 
human  nature.  They  agree  in  one  point,  viz.  that  it  was  not 
originally  a  conventional  thing  ;  that  no  company  of  men  could 
assemble  to  discuss  or  decide  upon  it ;  which  is,  if  properly 
comprehended,  an  unanswerable  proof  of  a  superhuman  origin. 
So,  with  the  immortal  Newton,  we  conclude,  that  "  God  gave  to 
man  reason  and  religion  by  giving  him  the  us^  of  words." 

That  all  mankind  had  at  first  one  language  and  one  and  the 
same  religious  faith,  is  very  clearly  and  logically  inferable  from 
the  most  ancient  traditions,  and  from  the  structure  of  the  three 
great  dialects  of  speech  from  which  the  modern  gibberish  of 
nations  has  descended.  This,  however,  is  a  task  not  to  be  im- 
posed upon  us,  nor  undertaken  by  us,  in  order  to  the  consum- 
mation of  our  present  argument.     The  strong  probability  that 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  39 

God  has  spoken  to  man  is,  we  presume,  already  established  from 
the  simple  fact  that  rnan  himself  speaks  ;  and  that  no  man  can 
give  himself  intelligible  language,  but  must  receive  it  from 
another. 

But  we  shall  ascend  from  the  possible  and  the  probable  to  the 
absolutely  certain  evidence  which  the  Bible  itself  furnishes,  that 
God  has,  in  that  volume,  spoken  to  man.  The  evidences  which 
that  mysterious  and  sublime  book  tenders  to  those  who  approach 
its  sacred  pages  with  a  candid  temper  and  a  becoming  reverence, 
are  its  doctrines,  its  precepts,  its  promises,  its  miracles,  and  its 
prophecies.  To  these  are  added  the  testimonies  of  unbelieving 
Jews  and  Pagans,  living  cotemporaneously  with  the  periods  of 
its  development  and  establishment  in  the  world. 

Now,  as  the  miracles  and  the  prophecies  are  matters  of  record 
in  the  book  itself,  as  much  as  its  doctrine,  its  precepts,  or  its  pro- 
mises, they  are  equally  matters  of  faith,  because  alike  matters 
of  sacred  history.  Still,  portions  of  the  prophecies,  not  fulfilled 
when  the  last  of  the  Prophets  and  Apostles  died,  being  yet  in 
progress  of  fulfilment,  afibrd  good  authority  for  classifying  the 
evidence  of  the  divine  origin  of  the  Bible  under  three  distinct 
heads — the  intrinsic,  the  extrinsic,  and  the  mixed. 

The  intrinsic  evidences  consist  in  the  doctrine,  the  precepts, 
the  promises,  the  miracles,  and  the  prophecies,  published  and 
fulfilled  in  the  records  of  the  book  itself  The  extrinsic  are  the 
testimonies  of  unbelieving  Jews  and  Gentiles,  given  to  the  facts 
reported  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament  records.  The  mixed 
are  its  prophecies  fulfilled  since  the  book  was  completed,  those 
now  fulfilling,  and  those  hereafter  to  be  fulfilled,  together  with 
those  monumental  institutions  appointed  in  the  Holy  Book  and 
observed  ever  since  its  publication,  down  to  the  present  day. 

Now  of  all  these  classes  of  argument  and  evidence,  we  shall 
select  but  one,  or  a  part  of  one  of  them,  in  demonstration  of 
what  we  mean  by  the  absolute  certainty  which  the  enlightened 
Christian  enjoys,  that  God  has,  in  very  deed,  spoken  to  man. 
That  shall  be  a  portion  of  the  class  of  mixed  evidences. 

Nothing,  it  is  alleged  by  some,  produces  absolute  certainty 
but  the  evidence  of  sense.  But  even  our  senses  sometimes  de- 
ceive us.  There  is,  perhaps,  something  better  than  the  mere 
evidence  of  sense.  The  doctrine  and  the  miracle  combined,  or 
the  thing  seen  by  the  outward  eyes  corresponding  with  the  pro- 
mise of  it,  is  better  than  either  apart.    They  are,  indeed,  two 


4Q  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

"witnesses  instead  of  one.  The  doctrine  speaks  for  God,  and  so 
does  the  miracle.  A  prophecy  written  in  a  book  a  thousand 
years  ago,  fulfilled  before  our  eyes,  is  the  highest  demonstration 
that  can  be  given  to  man  of  the  authenticity  and  inspiration  of  the 
book  in  .which  it  is  written.  The  proposition  and  the  miracle 
must  agree.  They  must  be  equally  worthy  of  having  God  for 
their  author. 

But  under  the  same  miracle  we  include  more  than  is  some- 
times designated  by  that  very  indefinite  term.  The  raising  of  a 
dead  man  to  life  by  a  word,  and  the  foretelling  of  a  complex 
event,  not  depending  on  the  laws  of  nature,  a  hundred  or  a 
thousand  years  before  it  happens,  are  equally  demonstrations  of 
the  divine  presence  and  power  in  the  person  professing  to  be 
sent  by  the  Creator  of  the  universe. 

With  us,  a  miracle  is  a  clisplay  of  supernatural  power  in  attesta- 
tion of  some  proposition  presented  hy  God  to  man  for  his  accept' 
ance.  Miracles  are,  therefore,  signs  manual  attached  to  com- 
missions to  authentic  messengers  from  God.  They  are  always 
vouchsafed  to  special  messengers  to  gain  special  credit  to  their 
messages. 

By  a  supernatural  power  we  understand  a  power  that  holds  in 
obedience  the  laws  of  nature,  according  to  the  will  of  him  that 
possesses  it.  It  is  a  power  that  suspends,  governs,  or  directs 
the  laws  of  nature  according  to  the  pleasure  of  its  possessor,  but 
with  reference  to  public  advantage.  Such  was  the  power  vouch- 
safed to  Moses,  to  Jesus,  to  many  of  the  Prophets,  to  all  the 
Apostles,  and  to  some  of  the  Evangelists  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Of  this  supernatural  power  there  are  two  sorts — one  that  ex- 
tends beyond  the  physical  laws  of  nature  ;  and  one  that  extends 
beyond  the  intellectual  power  of  man.  The  foretelling  of  some 
complex  future  event,  not  depending  upon  any  human  know- 
ledge of  the  operations  of  matter  or  of  mind,  is  as  clear  a  proof 
of  supernatural  intellectual  pov/er,  as  the  removal  of  a  mountain 
by  a  word  would  be  of  a  supernatural  physical  power.  A  man 
that  could  now  predict  the  fortunes  of  a  city,  a  family,  or  a 
nation,  for  one  or  five  hundred  years  to  come,  would  give  as 
clear  indications  that  he  possessed  the  Spirit  of  God  and  was 
divinely  commissioned,  as  if  he  raised  the  dead. 

But  they  are  not  always  proofs  to  the  same  persons.  Sensible 
and  outward  displays  of  physical  power — sucli  as  the  miracles 
of  our  Lord  and  his  Apostles,  were  addressed  to  the  senses  of 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  41 

living  men,  in  support  of  their  pretensions  to  a  divine  call  and 
mission.  But  the  foretelling  of  an  event  long  distant  is  not  a 
proof  to  any  contemporary  auditor  of  the  divine  mission  of  the 
Prophet.  The  miracle  is  developed  in  the  accomplishment,  and 
not  in  the  uttering,  of  the  prediction. 

When  Jesus  foretold  that  within  that  generation  the  temple 
would  be  so  razed  to  its  foundation  that  "  not  one  stone  should  be 
left  upon  another,"  not  the  prediction,  but  the  accomplishment 
of  it,  was  a  miracle  to  those  who  witnessed  that  awful  cata- 
strophe. But  who  will  not  admit  that  those  who  had  heard  him 
utter  the  prediction,  or  those  who  had  often  heard,  or  read  it, 
before  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  who  afterwards  saw  the  city 
and  the  temple  in  ruins,  according  to  the  prediction,  had  just  as 
ample  proof  and  as  full  assurance  that  he  spoke  the  truth,  and 
was  sent  by  God,  as  they  had  who  heard  him  call  Lazarus  of 
Bethany  out  of  his  grave,  and  who  witnessed  his  resurrection  in 
obedience  to  the  call  ?  The  fulfilment  of  prophecies  long  since 
uttered,  written,  and  published,  is,  therefore,  we  argue,  a  per- 
fect assurance  of  the  divine  mission  and  inspiration  of  the  Pro- 
phet to  all  who  live  contemporary  with  the  accomplishment,  or 
even  after  the  accomplishment,  provided  only  that  the  document 
containing  the  prophecy  was  certainly  extant  before  the  con- 
summation. 

The  way  is  now  open  to  a  full  development  of  the  assumption, 
viz.  that  we  who  now  live  have  just  as  perfect  an  assurance 
of  the  truth  of  the  sayings  and  doings  of  Prophets  and  Apostles 
as  they  had  who  lived  in  their  times ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  it 
is  not  only  possible  and  probable,  but  absolutely  certain  that  God 
has  spoken  to  man. 

An  induction  of  fulfilled  prophecies,  equal  to  a  volume,  might 
be  exhibited  from  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  Scriptures. 
The  Bible  is  the  only  book  in  the  world,  now  or  at  any  former 
period,  whose  prophecies  are  almost  as  numerous  as  its  pages. 
No  other  volume  presumes  to  give  the  whole  history  of  time  and 
of  man  but  the  Bible.  The  book,  as  before  shown,  contains  the 
history/  of  one  family  for  seventy  generations,  and  foretells  its 
future  fortunes  to  the  end  of  time.  The  Ishmaelites,  the  Idu- 
means,  the  Israelites,  (descended  from  Ishmael,  Esau,  and 
Jacob,)  and  their  countries,  together  with  Egypt,  Syria,  Moab, 
Ammon,  Amalek,  Babylon,  Tyre,  Sidon,  Nineveh,  as  well  as 
the  Chaldean,  Medo-Persian,  Grecian,  and  Eoman  Empires,  with 

4* 


42  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

all  the  fortunes  of  the  Christian  church,  are  written  out  on  the 
living  pages  of  the  sacred  book  of  Prophets  and  Apostles. 
Persons,  places,  and  events,  ages  before  their  appearance,  are 
foretold  with  the  accuracy  of  history,  by  Him  who  speaketh  of 
"the  things  that  are  not"  yet  in  existence,  *'as  though  they 
were."  I  shall,  however,  only  illustrate  and  exemplify  in  two 
or  three  particulars. 

Had  we  room  for  a  display  of  singular  items  occurring  in  the  ful- 
filment of  ancient  prophecy,  as  a  specimen  of  the  unerring  agree- 
ment between  the  prediction  and  its  accomplishment,  we  would 
quote  and  comment  upon  Deuteronomy,  chapter  xxviii.,  from  the 
48th  to  the  58th  verse  inclusive.  In  this  passage,  Moses  pre- 
dicts the  final  catastrophe,  and  ruin  of  his  own  nation  by  the 
Homsins,  ffieen  hundred  and  twenty  years  before  it  happened. 

He  specifies  various  particular  characteristics  of  that  calamity. 
We  shall  notice  but  ten  of  them: — 1.  The  people  or  nation  by 
whom  they  should  be  destroyed,  were  to  come  from  a  remote 
country.     2.  Their  armies  were  to  come  as  an  eagle  to  its  prey. 

3.  They  were  to   speak  a  language  unknown  to  the  Jews. 

4.  They  are  described  to  be  ^fierce  and  savage  people,  not  respect- 
ing age,  sex,  or  condition.  5.  They  were  first  to  station  them- 
selves among  them,  and  then  to  devour  their  provisions.  6.  They 
should  besiege  them  in  all  their  high-walled  towns  and  fortresses 
throughout  their  whole  country.  7.  They  were  to  be  reduced 
to  such  distress  and  famine  as  to  eat  their  own  ofi'spring. 
8.  The  most  affectionate  brothers  would  become  evil-disposed  and 
cruel  to  one  another ;  as  also  husbands  and  wives,  parents  and 
children.  9.  The  most  delicate  and  tender-hearted  ladies  would 
devour  their  own  offspring.  10,  They  should  perpetrate  these 
awful  deeds  secretly,  through  fear  of  being  robbed  of  their  re- 
past. 

Let  any  one  now  read  the  account  which  Josephus  gives  of 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  final  calamities  of  that  devoted 
nation,  and  see  whether  these  ten  items  were  not  accomplislied 
to  the  letter !  Let  him  read  to  the  close  of  his  narrative  of  the 
delicate  and  elegant  lady,  who,  in  every  circumstance,  verified 
the  prediction,  in  killing,  roasting,  and  devouring  secretly  her 
own  innocent  and  beloved  infant,  and  say  whether  Moses  did 
not  speak  by  the  inspiration  of  CJud.-^ 


Josephus,  Wars  of  the  Jews,  book  Ti.  chap.  3,  page  663. 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  43 

To  those  Tvho  witnessed  these  events,  and  who  had  in  their 
hands  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  then  extant  in  Hebrew  and 
Greek,  may  we  not  say  that  a  miracle  was  exhibited,  as  indis- 
putable as  any  miracle  performed  by  Moses  or  Jesus  in  the 
presence  of  living  thousands  of  spectators  ?  But,  to  us,  both 
the  prophecy  and  the  accomplishment  are  matters  of  record, 
and  therefore  matters  of  faith  and  not  of  sight. 

We  shall,  therefore,  advance  one  step  farther,  and  shoio  a  mira- 
cle— a  display  of  supernatural  intellectual  power — by  presenting 
a  Jew  at  the  proper  angle  of  vision.  Had  any  man  now  living 
the  power  of  raising  the  dead,  unless  we  accompanied  him  to 
the  grave  and  looked  on  at  the  proper  distance,  we  could  not 
witness  a  miracle.  So,  unless  we  open  the  eyes  of  our  under- 
standing, and  look  with  attention  and  discrimination  in  this 
case,  we  cannot  see  a  miracle.  Behold  this  Jew !  Whose  son 
is  he? 

His  father  Abraham  was  born  three  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  forty-one  years  ago !  His  father  circumcised  himself  and 
his  long-promised  son  Isaac,  some  three  thousand  seven  hundred 
and  forty  years  ago.  From  Isaac  sprang  Jacob,  Judah ; — the 
Jews.  That  nation,  counting  from  the  birth  of  its  founder,  was 
contemporary  with  the  Assyrian  empire  almost  fourteen  centu- 
ries. It  was  also  contemporary  with  the  Medes  and  the  Per- 
sians, with  the  Greeks  and  the  KOmans,  during  their  entire 
continuance,  and  now  survives  the  last  of  them  some  thirteen 
centuries!  But  in  all  this  so  strange,  so  unprecedented  an 
occurrence,  where  is  the  miracle?  The  Romans,  under  their 
general  Titus,  saw  no  miracle  in  the  destruction  of  the  nation, 
the  city,  and  the  temple,  because  they  had  not  the  prediction  in 
their  eye.  Nor  can  any  one  see  a  miracle  in  this  Jcav,  unless 
he  have  the  prediction  in  his  eye.  We  shall  now  read  the  pre- 
diction, while  this  circumcised  Jew  stands  before  us. 

Jeremiah  was  carried  captive  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  flou- 
rished from  the  629th  to  the  588th  year  before  Christ.  About 
the  600th  year  before  Christ,  or  2445  years  ago,  he  writes  the 
following  prediction,  chapter  xxx.  1-16.  "  I  am  with  thee,  O 
Israel !  saith  the  Lord,  to  save  thee ;  though  I  make  a  full  end 
of  all  nations  whither  I  have  scattered  thee,  yet  will  I  not 
MAKE  A  FULL  END  OF  THEE  ;  but  I  wiU  correct  thee  in  measure, 
and  will  not  leave  thee  altogether  unpunished.^^     "All  they 

THAT  DEVOUR  THEE  SHALL  BE  DEVOURED,  AND  ALL  THINE  ADYER- 


44  ANTECEDENTS   OF  BAPTISM. 

SARiES,  EVERY  oxE  OF  THEM,  sJiall  go  iiito  capUvity,  They  tTiat 
spoil  tliee  shall  he  a  spoil,  and  all  they  that  prey  upon  thee 
will  I  give  for  a  prey."  Where  now  are  the  nations  that  preyed 
upon  the  sons  of  Abraham  !  Where  are  their  adversaries — the 
Assyrian,  the  Medo-Persian,  the  Greek,  and  the  Roman  people! 
There  lives  not  the  man,  in  the  four  quarters  of  the  globe,  who 
can  say  that  in  his  veins  flows  one  drop  of  the  blood  of  an  As- 
syrian, a  Medo-Persian,  a  Greek,  or  a  Roman ;  while  millions 
of  the  house  of  Israel,  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  of  the  Jewish 
people,  can  severally  say  that  in  their  veins  flows  the  blood  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob !  Is  not,  then,  every  circumcised  Jew 
a  miracle,  a  proof  supernatural,  that  God  spake  by  Jeremiah 
and  the  Prophets  ? 

Two  predictions  are  here  fulfilled  and  verified  to  the  letter. 
All  these  great  ma^sses  are  lost,  being  mingled  with,  and  "  de- 
voured" by,  their  conquerors.  But  they  that  have  conquered, 
disinherited,  and  dispersed  the  Jews,  could  not  devour  them ; 
for  the  Lord  said,  ''I will  never  make  a  full  end  of  thee"  The 
destruction  of  the  one  and  the  preservation  of  the  other  consti- 
tute two  witnesses  for  the  Bible,  and  literally  fulfil  a  promise 
made  to  Abraham  when  leaving  Ur  of  Chaldea,  three  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  sixty-six  years  ago.  "Abraham,"  said  God, 
"  I  will  curse  him  that  curseth  thee,  and  I  will  be  a  God  to  thee 
and  to  thy  seed  after  thee." 

But  not  once,  but  often  the  same  promises  and  prophecies  are 
written  by  the  same  Prophets,  in  a  language  somewhat  different, 
and  on  that  account  the  more  certain  of  a  fair  construction. 
We  shall  take  another  example  from  Jeremiah,  chapter  xxxi.  35, 
36,  37.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  who  giveth  the  sun  for  a  light 
by  day,  and  the  ordinances  of  the  moon  and  of  the  stars  for  a 
light  by  night,  which  divideth  the  sea  when  the  waves  thereof 
roar ;  the  Lord  of  hosts  is  his  name :  If  those  ordinances  depart 
from  before  me,  saith  the  Lord,  then  the  seed  of  Israel  also  shall 
cease  from  being  a  nation  before  me  for  ever.  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,  If  heaven  above  can  be  measured,  and  the  foundations  of 
the  earth  searched  out  beneath,  I  will  also  cast  off"  all  the  seed 
of  Israel  for  all  that  they  have  done,  saith  the  Lord."  Here, 
then,  we  have  a  solemn  promise  from  God,  that  while  time  en- 
dures, while  the  world  lasts,  the  Jews  shall  continue  as  a  dis- 
tinct and  peculiar  people — a  standing  miracle,  indeed  of  the 
truth  of  the  Bible. 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM,  45 

Many  other  peculiarities  of  the  destiny  of  this  awful  and 
venerable  nation,  are  clearly  pronounced  by  Moses  and  their 
other  Prophets ;  such  as  the  whole  details  of  Deuteronomy,  28th 
chapter,  of  which  I  have  room  but  for  a  single  example,  verse 
37 :  "And  thou  shalt  become  an  astonishment,  a  proverb,  and  a 
by-word  amongst  all  the  nations  whither  the  Lord  shall  lead 
thee/^  Is  this  true  of  any  other  nation  ?  Do  we  not  hear  it  al- 
most as  often  as  we  hear  of  the  Jews  ?  Yet  Moses  foretold  it 
three  thousand  three  hundred  years  ago !  With  these  predic- 
tions in  our  hands,  and  a  Jew  before  our  eyes,  do  we  not  see  a 
miracle — a  demonstration  of  a  power  supernatural  and  divine  ? 

As  to  the  authenticity  and  the  antiquity  of  the  writings  of 
Moses,  we  happen  to  have  three  copies  of  them,  kept  by  differ- 
ent nations,  centuries  before  Jesus  Christ — the  Samaritan,  the 
Hebrew,  and  the  Septuagint.  He  that  overthrows  these — dis- 
credits, or  repudiates  them — may,  by  the  same  ingenuity  and 
learning,  discredit  and  repudiate  all  antiquity,  all  history, — sa- 
cred, civil,  and  ecclesiastical.  This  prophecy  and  the  law  of 
Moses  were  in  the  keeping  of  the  most  ancient  people  and  lan- 
guages known  to  any  living  man.  The  case  we  shall,  therefore, 
consider  as  fairly  and  fully  made  out,  viz,  that  it  is  possible  and 
probable,  nay,  absolutely  certain,  that  God  has  spoken  to  man  in 
the  Law  and  in  the  Prophets. 

But  some  one  may  ask  for  some  miracle  now  extant,  in  proof 
of  the  inspiration  of  the  Christian  Apostles.  We  might  hand 
such  a  one  the  Apocalypse ;  but,  being  a  book  of  symbols,  and 
not,  like  the  prophecies  we  have  quoted,  written  in  a  plain,  un- 
figurative  historic  style,  we  shall  give  one  example  from  the 
plain,  unadorned  epistles  of  Paul.  We  quote  from  2d  Thess. 
chap.  ii. — "  Now  we  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  coming  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering  together  unto  him, 
that  ye  be  not  soon  shaken  in  mind,  or  be  troubled,  neither  by 
spirit,  nor  by  word,  nor  by  letter,  as  from  us,  as  that  the  day  of 
Christ  is  at  hand.  Let  no  man  deceive  you  by  any  means :  for 
that  day  shall  not  come,  except  there  be  a  falling  away  first,  and 
that  man  of  sin  be  revealed,  the  son  of  perdition :  who  opposeth 
and  exalteth  himself  above  all  that  is  called  God,  or  that  is  wor- 
shipped ;  so  that  he,  as  God,  sitteth  in  the  temple  of  God,  show- 
ing himself  that  he  is  God. — Kemember  ye  not,  that,  when  I  was 
yet  with  you,  I  tuld  you  these  things  ?  And  now  ye  know  what 
withholdeth,  that  he  might  be  revealed  in  his  time.     For  the 


'46  ANTECEDENTS   OF  BAPTISM. 

mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work :  only  he  who  now  letteth, 
will  let,  until  he  be  taken  out  of  the  way.  And  then  shall  that 
Wicked  be  revealed,  whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  with  the 
spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  shall  destroy  with  the  brightness  of  his 
coming.  Even  him,  whose  coming  is  after  the  working  of  Satan, 
with  all  power  and  signs  and  lying  wonders,  and  with  all  de- 
ceivableness  of  unrighteousness  in  them  that  perish ;  because 
they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth,  that  they  might  be 
saved." 

The  case,  or  the  occasion  of  this  prophecy,  is  this : — In  his 
first  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  Paul  had  written  of  "  the  day 
of  the  Lord  coming  as  a  thief  in  the  night ;"  and  also  of  the 
change  to  be  effected  upon  those  who  should  be  alive  at  his  com- 
ing: "For  we,"  said  he,  "Avhich  are  alive  and  remain  unto  the 
coming  of  the  Lord,  shall  not  anticipate  them  that  are  asleep." 
From  which  sayings  some  then  taught,  that  the  day  of  the  Lord^s 
triumph  over  his  enemies'  destruction  was  soon  to  arrive,  just  as 
some  now  teach  that  souls  sleep,  because  Paul  thus  spake  of  the 
dead.  To  correct  these  errors,  Paul,  in  his  second  epistle,  by 
the  spirit  of  revelation,  informs  them  that  the  day  of  the  Lord's 
triumph  and  the  fall  of  his  enemies  was  then  at  a  great  distance. 
This  leads  him  to  expatiate  on  some  great  intervening  events. 
That  day  shall  not  come  till  a  great  apostasy  from  Christ  to  an- 
other personage  shall  have  occurred;  till  that  man  of  sin,  or 
"tJie  man  of  sin," — the  lawless  one,  described  by  Daniel  vii.  25, — 
shall  have  been  revealed. 

The  Apostle  introduces  this  mysterious  personage  as  one  fre- 
quently spoken  of  among  the  Thessalonians.  He  calls  him  ''that 
lawless  one,"  or  "the  man  of  sin."  lie  was  described  by  Daniel 
in  these  words : — "  He  shall  speak  [impious]  words  against  the 
Most  High,  and  shall  wear  out  [or  consume]  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High,  and  shall  think  [or  determine]  to  change  times  and 
laws  ;  and  they  [the  saints]  shall  be  given  into  his  hand  until  a 
time,  times,  and  the  dividing  of  time  ;  but  the  judgment  [upon 
him]  shall  sit,  and  theij  shall  take  awaij  his  dominion  to  consume 
and  destroy  it  unto  the  end."  This  mystic  man  of  sin,  the  Pope 
OF  Rome,  undoubtedly,  is  described  in  the  following  particular 
points : — 

1.  He  was  to  be  the  son  or  creature  of  an  apostasy  from  the 
primitive  faith  and  manners  taught  by  the  Apostles.  As  Na- 
poleon the  Great  grow  out  of  the  French  Revolution,  so  did  the 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  47 

Pope  grow  out  of  the  metropolitan  hierarchies  and  councils  that 
sprang  from  the  defection  of  the  ancient  church. 

2.  This  man  without  law  opposed,  in  his  pretensions,  all  that 
were  called  magistrates,  or  that  were  held  in  reverence  by  the 
people. 

3.  He  placed  himself  upon  a  throne. 

4.  This  throne  was  not  erected  in  a  Pagan  temple,  but  in  the 
church  or  temple  of  God.  He  is  neither  a  Jewish  nor  a  Pagan, 
but  a  Christian  High-Pt^est,  Father,  or  Pope. 

5.  He  shows  himself  to  be,  or  sets  himself  up,  as  a  Vicegerent 
of  the  Almighty,  and  calls  himself  *'  His  Holiness  Lord  God 
THE  Pope." 

6.  He  was  not  to  appear  for  some  time  after  the  Apostle  wrote 
this  letter — not,  indeed,  while  the  Roman  Caesars  called  them- 
selves severally  Pontifex  Maximus,  or  the  Great  High-PHest  of  the 
Gods. 

7.  But  the  letting,  or  opposing  Pagan  chiefs,  are  to  be  taken 
out  of  the  way. 

8.  And  when  that  is  done,  this  mysterious  son  of  perdition 
and  of  iniquity,  called  by  Paul  'Hhe  lawless  one,"  should  be  fully 
developed. 

9.  He  was  to  appear,  after  the  modus  operandi  of  the  Devil,  by 
good  words,  fair  speeches,  pretended  sanctity — "by  all  the  de- 
ceivableness  of  unrighteousness," — transforming  himself  into  an 
angel  of  light,  while  at  heart  as  black  as  Erebus. 

10.  God,  it  is  affirmed,  shall  permit  all  those  who  loved  not 
the  truth  in  their  hearts,  to  be  deluded  by  this  "  wicked  one," 
that  they  all  might  be  condemned  as  reprobate  silver,  as  spurious 
coin,  and  removed  from  the  faithful. 

Such  is  the  apostolic  profile  of  the  first  of  the  Gregories — of 
him  that  plucked  the  golden  mitre  from  the  patriarchs  of  Alex- 
andria, Antioch,  Constantinople,  and  Jerusalem — who  assumed 
to  himself  the  government  of  the  realms  of  Purgatory,  the  dis- 
posal of  all  the  crowns  of  the  heirs  of  Pagan  Rome,  and  who, 
by  miracles  of  deceit,  gained  the  confidence  of  an  apostate 
church,  and  consolidated  it  into  a  politico-ecclesiastic  empire — ■ 
*'  Babylon  the  Great,  the  Mother  of  Harlots" — a  monster 
once  the  wonder  of  the  world  and  the  terror  of  all  the  excellent 
of  the  earth. 

Could  any  one,  we  may  now  inquire,  not  gifted  by  a  plenary 
inspiration  from  the  sempiternal  sources  of  light,  to  whose  eye 


48  ANTECEDENTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future  are  all  alike,  have  thus  so 
clearly,  so  comprehensively,  and  yet  so  minutely  sketched  the 
portrait  of  the  most  unnatural  and  mysterious  monster  of  ini- 
quity the  world  ever  saw  ? 

And  what  event  more  unlikely  to  happen,  than  that  one  pre- 
tending to  be  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  who,  twenty  years  before  this 
portrait  was  sketched,  had  been  crucified  between  two  malefac- 
tors without  the  gates  of  Jerusalem — than  that  one  assuming  to 
be  the  successor  of  that  Galilean  Peter,  the  fisherman,  who  had 
neither  silver  nor  gold,  and  who  had  forsaken  all  that  he  had  to 
partake  in  the  toils,  the  trials,  and  the  honours  of  his  Master, 
would  have  ever  thought  of  aspiring  to  such  a  giddy  and  am- 
bitious eminence,  much  less  of  attaining  it  and  transmitting  it 
to  a  long  series  of  successors  through  more  than  twelve  full  cen- 
turies of  years  ? 

No  one  can  make  himself  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the 
origin,  progress,  and  consummation  of  the  Popedom — as  de- 
veloped in  the  lives  of  the  Popes — or  spend  one  year  in  Rome, 
holding  in  his  hand  Daniel's  portrait  of  the  man  of  sin  in  his 
7th  chapter,  and  that  of  Paul  in  this  letter  to  the  Thessalonians, 
and  not  see  a  stupendous  miracle  in  the  literal  and  exact  ac- 
complishment of  predictions  so  copious  and  yet  so  minute,  held 
by  the  church  of  all  ages  and  of  all  nations,  and  now  read  in  all 
the  languages  of  the  civilized  world,  all  literally  verified  in  one 
individual  person  succeeding  another  of  the  same  grand  cha* 
racteristics,  for  so  many  centuries.  lie  that  does  not,  in  these 
ample  and  precise  specifications,  recognise  the  finger  of  God  in 
a  clearly  developed  miracle  of  the  most  stupendous  dimensions, 
has  certainly  sipped  no  little  of  the  inebriating  cup  of  delusions 
by  which  this  great  sorcerer  has  enchanted  and  deceived  the 
nations  of  paganized  Christendom. 

Our  faith  in  the  gospel,  we  now  conclude  from  these  mere 
specimens  of  evidence,  rests  upon  the  clearest  and  most  solid 
basis.  It  rests  upon  miracles  well  attested  by  others,  and  on 
miracles  seen  by  ourselves.  It  rests  upon  the  purity  of  its  doc- 
trine, the  majesty  and  the  excellency  of  its  precepts,  the  riches, 
the  fulness,  and  the  glory  of  its  promises.  It  rests  upon  the 
perfect  originality,  the  unity,  the  grandeur,  and  the  divine  sub- 
limity of  its  adorable  Author.  It  was  promulged  by  the 
purest,  the  noblest,  and  the  most  disinterested  heralds  that  ever 
announced  a  new  doctrine  to  men.    It  was  sustained  by  their 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  49 

godly  sincerity,  their  toils,  their  privations,  their  endurance  of 
evil,  and  their  glorious  martyrdom  for  its  sake.  It  enrols 
amongst  its  believers  and  defenders  the  greatest,  the  wisest, 
the  best,  and  the  most  gifted  of  mankind.  All  that  we  love, 
admire,  and  venerate  in  human  character,  appears  in  the 
boldest  relief  in  the  piety,  humanity,  and  universal  excellence 
of  its  friends  and  admirers.  It  confers  upon  all  its  fully  ini- 
tiated disciples,  the  whole  circle  of  graces  that  adorn  human 
nature,  and  fills  their  lives  with  the  largest  and  richest  clusters 
of  the  delicious  fruits  of  benevolence  and  mercy.  It  is  just  such 
a  message  from  the  Throne  of  heaven  as,  had  we  been  duly 
enlightened,  we  might  have  expected  ;  such  a  glorious  display 
of  divinity  and  humanity  as  fully  and  eternally  glorifies  God, 
and  bestows  infinite  honour  and  happiness  on  man. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   BIBLE. — PRINCIPLES   OF   INTERPRETATION. 

The  whole  Christian  religion,  in  its  facts,  its  precepts,  its 
promises,  its  doctrine,  its  institutions,  is  presented  to  the 
world  in  a  written  record.  The  writings  of  Prophets  and 
Apostles  contain  all  the  divine  and  supernatural  knowledge  in 
the  world.  Now,  unless,  these  sacred  ivritings  can  be  cer- 
tainly interpreted,  the  Christian  religion  never  can  be  certainly 
understood.  Every  argument  that  demonstrates  the  necessity 
of  such  a  written  document  as  the  Bible,  equally  demonstrates 
the  necessity  of  fixed  and  certain  principles  or  rules  of  inter- 
pretation :  for  without  the  latter,  the  former  is  of  no  value  what- 
ever to  the  world. 

All  the  difierence,  in  religious  faith,  opinion,  and  sentiment, 
amongst  those  who  acknowledge  the  Bible,  are  occasioned  by 
false  principles  of  interpretation,  or  by  a  misapplication  of  the 
true  principles.  There  is  no  law,  nor  standard, — literary,  moral, 
or  religious, — that  can  coerce  human  thought  or  action,  by  only 
promulging  or  acknowledging  it.  If  a  law  can  efiiect  any  thing, 
our  actions  must  be  conformed  to  it.  Were  all  students  of  the 
Bible  taught  to  apply  the  same  rules  of  interpretation  to  its 

5 


50  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

pages,  there  would  be  a  greater  uniformity  in  opinion  and  senti- 
ment than  ever  resulted  from  the  simple  adoption  of  any  written 
creed. 

Great  unanimity  has  obtained  in  most  of  the  sciences  in  con- 
sequence of  the  adoption  of  certain  rules  of  analysis  and  syn- 
thesis ;  for  all  who  work  by  the  same  rules  come  to  the  same 
conclusions.  And  may  it  not  be  possible  that,  in  this  divine 
science  of  religion,  there  may  yet  be  a  very  great  degree  of 
unanimity  of  sentiment  and  uniformity  of  practice  amongst  all 
who  acknowledge  its  divine  authority  ?  Is  the  school  of  Christ 
the  only  school  in  which  there  can  be  no  unanimity — no  pro- 
ficiency in  knowledge  ?  Is  the  Book  of  God  the  only  volume 
which  can  never  be  understood  alike  by  those  who  read  and 
study  it  ?  It  cannot  be  supposed,  but  by  dishonouring  God :  for, 
as  all  the  children  of  God  are  taught  by  God,  if  they  are  neces- 
sarily unintelligent  in  his  oracles  and  discordant  in  their  views, 
the  deficiencies  must  rather  be  imputed  to  the  teacher  than  to  the 
taught ;  for  the  pupils  in  this  school  can  be  taught  other 
sciences  in  other  schools,  with  such  uniformity  and  harmony  of 
views  as  to  make  it  manifest  to  all  that  they  are  the  disciples 
of  one  teacher. 

God's  Book,  is,  however,  put  into  the  hands  of  men  as  it  was 
first  spoken  to  men :  but  they  have,  in  some  cases,  been  taught 
not  to  receive  it  from  God,  but  from  men.  They  do  not  con- 
sider that  the  written  hook,  as  well  as  the  spoken  word,  is  ten- 
dered to  us  under  the  stipulations  of  human  knowledge — accord- 
ing to  the  contract  between  man  and  man,  touching  the  value 
or  meaning  of  the  currency  of  thought : — that  every  word  and 
sentence  is  to  be  weighed  and  tested  by  the  constitutional  laws 
and  standards  of  the  currency  of  ideas. 

When  one  person  addresses  another,  he  supposes  the  person 
addressed  competent  to  interpret  his  words ;  and,  therefore,  all 
wise  and  benevolent  men  select  such  words  and  phrases  as,  in 
their  judgment,  can  be  interpreted  by  those  addressed.  Every 
speaker  proceeds,  in  all  his  communications,  upon  the  principle 
that  his  hearer  is  an  interpreter — that  he  has  not  first  to  be 
taught  the  science  of  interpretation  ;  and  that  he  is  bound  so  to 
express  himself,  that  his  hearer  may  interpret  and  understand 
his  words  by  an  art  which  is  supposed  to  be  native — which  ia 
indeed  universal — common  to  all  nations,  barbarous  as  well  as 
civilized. 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  51 

Now,  as  God  is  infinitely  wise  and  benevolent,  in  his  oral 
communications  to  men,  he  proceeded  upon  the  principle  ^hat 
they  were,  by  this  native  art,  competent  interpreters  of  his  ex- 
pressions ;  for  otherwise,  his  addresses  could  be  of  no  value. 
He  could  not  even  begin  to  teach  them  a  new  art  of  interpre- 
tation, as  respected  his  communications,  but  by  using  their  own 
words  in  the  stipulated  sense,  unless  we  imagine  a  miracle  in 
every  case,  and  suppose  that  all  his  words  were  to  be  understood 
by  a  miraculous  interposition.  And  this  idea,  if  carried  out, 
would  make  a  verbal  revelation  of  no  value  whatever  to  the 
children  of  men. 

If  human  language  had  never  been  confounded — if  a  multi- 
tude of  different  dialects  had  not  been  introduced — no  occasion 
for  translating  language,  as  a  matter  of  course,  would  ever  have 
existed.  Again,  if  words  and  phrases,  and  the  manners  and 
customs  of  mankind  were  unchangeably  fixed,  or  universally 
the  same  at  all  times  and  in  all  countries,  the  art  of  interpreting 
would  have  been  still  more  simple  than  it  is  ;  for  so  far  as  it  is 
artificial,  it  is  owing  to  different  dialects,  idioms,  manners, 
customs,  and  all  the  varieties  which  the  ever-changing  con- 
ditions of  society  have  originated  and  are  still  originating. 

At  present,  however,  we  would  only  impress  upon  the  mind 
of  the  reader,  that  the  very  fact  that  we  have  a  written  reve- 
lation— that  this  revelation  was  first  spoken,  then  written — sup- 
poses that  there  is  somewhere  a  native  or  an  acquired  art  of 
interpretation ;  that  the  persons  addressed  were  already  in  pos- 
session of  that  art :  for  without  such  an  understanding,  there 
would  have  been  neither  wisdom  nor  benevolence  in  giving  to 
mankind  any  verbal  communication  from  God. 

In  the  present  essay,  we  shall  offer  a  very  few  remarks  upon, 
first,  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  ;  second,  the  language  of  the 
Bible ;  third,  the  distribution  of  the  Bible  into  chapters  and 
verses  ;  fourth,  the  different  dispensations  of  redemption ;  and 
fifth,  offer  seven  cardinal  rules  of  interpretation. 

\st  Revelation  and  inspiration,  properly  so  called,  have  to  do 
only  with  such  subjects  as  are  supernatural,  or  beyond  the 
reach  of  human  intellect,  in  its  most  cultivated  and  elevated 
state.  In  this  sense,  "holy  men  of  God  spoke  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  But  besides  this  inspiration  of 
original  and  supernatural  ideas,  there  was  another  species  of 
supernatural  aid  afforded  the  saints  who  wrote  the  historical 


fi  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

parts  of  the  sacred  scriptures.  There  was  a  revival  in  their 
minds  of  vrhat  they  themselves  had  seen  and  heard ;  and  in 
reference  to  traditions  handed  down,  such  a  superintendency 
of  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  as  excluded  the  possi* 
bility  of  mistake  in  the  matters  of  fact  which  they  recorded. 
The  promise  *'  of  leading  into  all  truth,"  and  the  promise  of 
"  bringing  all  things  before  known  to  remembrance,"  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  include  all  that  we  understand  by  inspiration  in  its 
primary  and  secondary  import. 

But  while  this  inspiration  precluded  the  selection  of  incorrect 
or  unsuitable  words  and  sentences,  the  inspired  men  delivered 
supernatural  communications  in  their  own  peculiar  modes  of 
expressing  themselves.  To  illustrate  my  meaning  by  another 
reference  to  the  gift  of  tongues ; — the  subjects  of  that  splendid 
gift  in  a  moment  understood  those  foreign  languages  as  well  at 
least  as  they  knew  their  own ;  and  in  expressing  themselves, 
selected  such  terms  as,  in  their  judgment,  most  fitly  and  in- 
telligibly communicated  their  ideas.  In  other  words,  their  own 
judgment  or  taste  in  the  selection  of  terms  was  not  suspended 
by  the  new  language.  They  used  the  terms  of  the  new  dialect 
as  they  used  the  terms  of  their  native  tongue  ; — chose  such  as, 
in  their  judgment,  would  most  clearly  and  forcibly  reveal  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit  to  their  hearers. 

We  regard  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  as  gifted  with  a  full 
and  perfect  knowledge  of  the  Christian  institution;  which 
entitled  them,  without  the  possibility  of  error,  to  open  to  man- 
kind the  whole  will  of  their  Master,  whether  in  the  form  of  fact, 
precept,  promise,  or  threatening  ;  and  as  furnished  with  such 
a  knowledge  of  the  signs  of  those  ideas  in  human  language  as  to 
express  this  knowledge  clearly,  accurately,  and  infallibly  to 
mankind.  But  from  what  they  have  spoken  and  written,  we 
are  authorized  to  think  that  they  were  as  free  in  the  selection 
of  words  and  phrases  as  I  am  in  endeavoring  to  communicate 
my  views  of  their  inspiration. 

My  reasons  for  this  opinion  are,  that  neither  the  Prophets  nor 
the  Apostles  exhibit  any  sort  of  solicitude  in  always  expressing 
themselves  in  the  same  words  upon  the  same  subject.  Nor 
doies  any  one  of  them  scorn  at  all  concerned  to  be  consistent 
with  himself  on  all  occasions,  in  using  the  same  words  ;  either 
in  delivering  precepts,  uttering  promises,  or  in  giving  a  nar- 
rative of  any  of  the  incidents  of  his  own  life  or  those  of  his 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  53 

companions.  We  have  no  less  than  three  accounts  of  Paul's 
conversion  and  mission  to  the  Gentiles — one  from  Luke,  and 
two  from  himself;  one  delivered  to  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem,  and 
one  before  Agrippa  ;  yet  no  two  of  them  agree  in  word^  though 
in  sense  they  are  uniformly  the  same.*  We  have  two  accounts 
of  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles — one  by  Luke,  and  one  by 
Peter  ;t  and  these  are  as  diverse  in  words,  though  as  accordant 
in  sense,  as  the  narrative  of  Paul's  conversion.  We  have  four 
memoirs  of  Jesus  Christ,  brief  records  of  his  sayings  and 
doings  ;  and  yet  no  two  of  them  agree  in  words,  in  narrating  a 
single  speech,  or  in  describing  a  single  incident  in  his  life  ; 
though  there  is,  as  far  as  they  severally  relate,  a  most  perfect 
harmony  in  sense. 

Peter's  allusion  to  the  epistles  of  Paul  fully  expresses  all  that 
we  desire  to  teach  on  the  subject,  "  Paul  wrote,'^  says  he, 
**  according  to  the  wisdom  given  him."  Paul's  epistles  are,  then, 
the  development  and  application  of  that  wisdom  given  to  him, 
expressed  in  his  own  style.  It  may,  indeed,  be  said  that, 
guided  by  wisdom,  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  select,  on  any 
occasion,  words  or  phrases  inaccurate,  or  not  clearly  and  fully  ex- 
pressive of  the  ideas  suggested ;  so  that,  as  Paul  himself  says,  he 
explained  spiritual  things  in  spiritual  words,  or  in  words  taught 
by  the  Spirit,  We  must,  therefore,  regard  these  words  as  the 
words  of  the  Spirit,  It  was  God's  Spirit  speaking  in  them, 
through  such  words  as  were  natural  to  them  from  education  and 
habit.  According  to  these  views,  the  English,  or  German,  or 
French  Noav  Testament,  is  as  much  the  word  of  the  Spirit  as 
the  Greek  original,  if  that  original  is  faithfully  translated ;  but 
in  any  other  view  of  inspiration,  we  have  not  the  word  of  God, 
nor  the  teachings  of  the  Spirit,  only  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
originals  of  the  two  covenants. 

Before  we  dismiss  this  subject,  it  may  be  observed  that  we 
find  many  things  in  these  writings  which  are  quite  natural  and 
common,  for  which  inspiration  is  neither  claimed  nor  pretended  ; 
many  specimens  of  which  will  occur  to  the  reader,  when  one  is 
fairly  examined.  "  Make  haste  to  come  to  me  soon  ;  for  Demas 
having  loved  the  present  world  has  forsaken  me,  and  is  gone 
into  Thessalonica,  Crescens  into  Galatia,  and  Titus  into  Dal- 
matia.     Only  Luke  is  with  me.     Take  Mark  and  bring  him  with 

♦  Acts,  chaps,  ix.  xxii.  xxiv.  f  Acts,  chaps,  x.  xi. 


$4  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

yon,  for  he  is  very  nseful  to  me  in  the  ministry.  But  Tychycns 
I  have  sent  to  Ephesus.  The  cloak  which  I  left  at  Troas  with 
Carpus  bring  with  you,  and  the  books,  but  especially  the 
parchments.^'* 

The  Apostles,  acting  under  the  high  authority  and  commission 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  inspired  with  all  divine  and  supernatural 
knowledge,  exhibited  in  doctrine,  in  precepts,  ordinances, 
promises,  threatenings,  and  development  of  things  spiritual, 
celestial,  eternal,  are,  in  consequence  of  these  endowments  and 
authority,  worthy  of  all  respect  and  regard,  even  when  writing 
upon  the  most  common  matters ;  and  these  apparently  uninter- 
esting things  are,  to  the  student  of  the  Living  Oracles,  of  great 
value  and  of  indispensable  importance  in  giving  a  full  develop- 
ment of  the  religion  of  Christianity,  in  all  its  condescensions  and 
adaptations  to  the  most  minute  and  common  concerns  and 
business  of  this  life. 

2d.  God  lias  spoJcen  hy  men,  for  men.  The  language  of  the 
Bible  is,  then,  liuman  language.  It  is,  therefore,  to  be  ex- 
amined by  the  same  rules  which  are  applicable  to  the  language 
of  any  other  book,  and  to  be  understood  according  to  the  true 
and  proper  meaning  of  the  words,  in  their  current  acceptation, 
at  the  times  and  in  the  places  in  which  they  were  originally 
written  and  translated. 

If  we  have  a  revelation  from  God  in  human  language,  the 
words  of  that  volume  must  be  intelligible  by  the  common  usage 
of  language  ;  they  must  be  precise  and  determinate  in  signifi- 
cation, and  that  signification  must  be  philologically  ascertained — 
that  is,  as  the  words  and  sentences  of  other  books  are  ascer- 
tained by  the  use  of  the  dictionary  and  grammar.  Were  it 
otherwise,  and  did  men  require  a  new  dictionary  and  grammar 
to  understand  the  Book  of  God, — then,  without  that  divine  dic- 
tionary and  grammar,  we  could  have  no  revelation  from  God ; 
for  a  revelation  that  needs  to  be  revealed  is  no  revelation  at  all. 

Again,  if  any  special  rules  are  to  be  sought  for  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  sacred  writings,  unless  these  rules  have  been  given 
in  the  volume,  as  a  part  of  the  revelation,  and  are  of  divine 
authority ; — without  such  rules,  the  Book  is  sealed ;  and  I 
know  of  no  greater  abuse  of  language  than  to  call  a  sealed  book 
a  revelation. 

*  2  Timothy,  iv.  8-12. 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  65 

But  the  fact  that  God  has  clothed  his  communications  in 
human  language,  and  that  he  has  spoken  by  men,  to  men,  in 
their  own  language,  is  decisive  evidence  that  he  is  to  be  under- 
stood as  one  man  conversing  with  another.  Righteousness,  or 
what  we  sometimes  call  honesty,  requires  this ;  for  unless  he 
first  made  a  special  stipulation  when  he  began  to  speak,  his 
words  were,  in  all  candour,  to  be  taken  at  the  current  value ;  for 
he  that  would  contract  with  a  man  for  any  thing,  stipulating  his 
contract  in  the  currency  of  the  country,  without  any  explanation, 
and  should  afterwards  intimate  that  a  dollar  with  him  meant 
only  three  francs,  would  be  regarded  as  a  dishonest  and  unjust 
man.  And  shall  we  impute  to  the  God  of  truth  and  justice 
what  would  blast  the  reputation  of  a  fellow-citizen  at  the  tri- 
bunal of  political  justice  and  public  opinion  ! 

As,  then,  there  is  no  divine  dictionary,  grammar,  or  special 
rules  of  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  then  that  Book,  to  be  under- 
stood, must  be  submitted  to  the  common  dictionary,  grammar, 
and  rules  of  the  language  in  which  it  was  written  ;  and  as  a 
living  language  is  constantly  fluctuating,  the  true  and  proper 
meaning  of  the  words  and  sentences  of  the  Bible  must  be 
learned  from  the  acceptation  of  those  words  and  phrases  in  the 
times  and  countries  in  which  it  was  written.  In  all  this  there 
is  nothing  special ;  for  Diodorus,  Herodotus,  Josephus,  Philo, 
Tacitus,  Sallust,  &c.,  and  all  the  writers  of  all  languages,  ages, 
and  nations,  are  translated  and  understood  in  the  same  manner. 

Enthusiasts  and  fanatics  of  all  ages  determine  the  meaning 
of  words  from  that  knowledge  of  things  which  they  imagine 
themselves  to  possess,  rather  than  from  the  words  of  the  author : 
"  they  decide  by  what  they  suppose  he  ought  to  mean,  rather 
than  by  what  he  says." 

To  adopt  any  other  course,  or  to  apply  any  other  rules, 
would  necessarily  divest  the  sacred  writings  of  every  attribute 
that  belongs  to  the  idea  of  revelation.  It  must  never  be  for- 
gotten in  perusing  the  Bible,  that  in  the  structure  of  sentences, 
in  the  figures  of  speech,  in  the  arrangement  and  use  of  words, 
it  differs  not  at  all  from  other  writings ;  and  must,  therefore,  be 
understood  and  interpreted  as  they  are. 

How,  then,  is  the  meaning  of  its  words  to  be  acquired? 
Every  word  in  the  Scriptures  has  some  ideas  attached  to  it, 
which  we  call  its  sense  or  meaning.  But  this  meaning  is  not 
natural,  but  conventional.     It  is  agreement,  usage,  or  custom, 


56  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

that  has  constituted  a  connexion  between  words  and  the  ideas 
represented  by  them ;  and  this  connexion  between  words  and 
ideas,  has  become  necessary  by  usage. 

How  this  originated  is  not  the  question  before  us ;  the  fact  is 
all  that  now  interests  us.  We  are  not  at  liberty  to  affix  what 
meaning  we  please  to  words,  nor  to  use  them  arbitrarily  ;  inas- 
much as  custom  has  affixed,  by  common  consent,  a  meaning  to 
them. 

The  meaning  of  words  is,  therefore,  now  to  be  ascertained  by 
testimony  ;  and  that  testimony  we  have  collected  in  those  books 
called  dictionaries,  which,  by  the  consent  of  those  who  spoke 
that  language  faithfully,  represent  the  meaning  attached  to  those 
terms,  or  the  ideas  of  which  those  words  were  the  signs.  "The 
fact,"  says  Professor  Stuart,  "  that  usage  has  attached  any  par- 
ticular meaning  to  a  word,  like  any  other  historical  fact,  is  to  be 
proved  by  adequate  testimony.  That  testimony  may  be  drawn 
from  books  in  which  the  word  is  employed,  or  from  daily  use  in 
conversation.  But  the  fact  of  a  particular  meaning  being 
attached  to  a  word  when  once  established,  can  no  more  be 
changed  or  denied  than  any  historical  event  whatever.  Of 
course,  an  arbitrary  sense  can  never  with  propriety  be  sub- 
stituted for  a  real  one.  All  men,  in  their  daily  conversation  and 
writings,  attach  hut  one  sense  to  a  word  at  the  same  time  and  in  the 
same  passage,  unless  they  design  to  speak  ip  enigmas.  Of 
course,  it  would  be  in  opposition  to  the  universal  custom  of  lan- 
guage, if  more  than  one  meaning  should  be  attached  to  any 
word  in  Scripture,  in  such  a  case" — that  is,  in  the  same  passage, 
and  at  the  same  time. 

But,  although  a  word  has  but  one  meaning  at  the  same  time 
and  in  the  same  passage,  it  may,  at  another  time  and  in  another 
passage,  have  a  different  meaning  ;  for  many  words  have,  by 
common  consent,  more  meanings  than  one.  This  is  what  has 
caused  so  much  ambiguity  in  language,  and  so  much  difficulty 
in  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  some  sentences  and  passages  in 
all  authors,  and  in  the  sacred  writings. 

Every  word,  indeed,  had  but  one  meaning  at  first ;  but  to  pre- 
vent the  multiplication  of  words  to  an  indefinite  extent,  and  to 
obviate  the  difficulties  that  would  thence  arise  in  the  acquisition 
of  the  knowledge  of  a  language,  words,  in  process  of  time,  were 
used  to  represent  different  meanings.  A  question  then  arises, 
How  shall  we  always  ascertain  the  meaning  of  any  particular  wordf 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  5t 

If  it  have  but  one  meaning,  testimony  or  the  dictionary  decides 
it  at  once ;  but  if  it  have  more  meanings,  then  the  proximate 
■words  used  in  construction  with  it,  usually  called  the  context, 
together  with  the  design  of  the  speaker  or  writer,  must  decide 
its  meaning.  Usage  and  the  context  will  generally  decide.  If 
these  fail,  the  design  of  the  speaker  and  parallel  passages  must 
be  summoned.  These  are  the  aids  which  the  canons  of  interpre- 
tation authorize  in  such  cases. 

That  there  is,  generally,  perfect  certainty  in  the  proper  in- 
terpretation of  a  word — that  is,  in  ascertaining  or  communicating 
its  meaning,  (for  this  is  what  is  properly  called  the  act  of  in- 
terpretation,) is  felt  and  acknowledged  on  all  hands.  But  the 
foundation,  or  reason  of  this  certainty,  is  a  matter  which  should 
be  evident  to  all. 

Now,  unless  we  are  compelled  by  necessity,  arising  from  the 
laws  of  language,  to  any  particular  meaning,  there  can  be  no 
certainty.  Therefore,  this  compulsion  is  the  very  cause  of  cer- 
tainty. Philological  necessity,  or  that  necessity  which  the 
common  usage  of  a  word,  the  context,  the  design  of  the  loriter  create, 
in  giving  a  particular  meaning  to  a  word  in  a  sentence,  is  the 
ground  of  that  complete  certainty,  which,  whether  he  can  or 
cannot,  explain,  every  one  feels  in  the  meaning  of  the  language. 
And,  as  a  very  eminent  critic  has  said,  "  If  any  one  should  deny 
that  the  above  precepts  lead  to  certainty,  when  strictly  observed, 
he  would  deny  the  possibility  of  finding  the  meaning  of  lan- 
guage with  certainty."  These  remarks  would  be  sufficient  to 
guide  us  in  acquiring  the  meaning  of  words,  if  they  had  any 
one  class  of  meanings  only.  But  there  is  the  literal  and  the  tropi- 
cal or  figurative  meaning  of  words,  which  must  be  distinguished 
before  we  can  feel  ourselves  competent  to  decide,  with  perfect 
certainty,  the  true  and  proper  meaning  of  any  composition. 

And,  first,  of  the  literal  meaning  of  words.  As  has  been  ob- 
served, every  word  originally  had  but  one  meaning  ;  and  this, 
of  course,  which  was  first,  was  the  natural,  or  the  literal  mean- 
ing. Some  of  our  most  approved  philologists  and  grammarians 
define  the  literal  sense  of  the  words  to  be,  "  The  sense  which  is 
so  connected  with  them,  that  it  is  the  first  in  order,  and  is  spon- 
taneously presented  to  the  mind,  as  soon  as  the  sound  of  the 
word  is  heard."  "  The  literal  sense  does  not  differ,"  says  the 
celebrated  Ernesti,  "  among  the  older  and  valuable  writers, 
from  the  sense  of  the  letter."    But  better  defined  by  Professor 


68  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

Stuart,  of  Andover : — **  The  literal  sense  is  the  same  as  the 
pi'imiiive  or  original  sense ;  or,  at  least,  it  is  equivalent  to  that 
sense  which  has  usurped  the  place  of  the  original  one ;  for  ex- 
ample, the  original  sense  of  the  word  tragedy  has  long  ceased  to 
be  current;  and  the  literal  sense  of  this  word,  now,  is  that 
which  has  taken  the  place  of  the  original  one."  Popular  writers, 
in  speaking  of  the  sense  of  words,  are  wont  to  substitute  gram- 
matical for  literal,  as  equivalent;  because  literal,  in  its  Latin 
extraction,  and  grammatical,  in  its  Greek  extraction,  exactly  re- 
present the  same  thing.  But  in  a  shade  differing  from  these 
they  use  the  word  historical  in  reference  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures.  "  Since,"  says  T.  H.  Home,  in  his  Introduction, 
**  it  is  not  sufficient  to  know  grammatically  the  different  expres- 
sions employed  by  writers  to  interpret  ancient  works,  so  it  is 
necessary  that  we  add  Tiistorical  interpretation  to  our  gram- 
matical or  literal  knowledge.  By  historical  interpretations,  we 
are  to  understand  that  we  give  to  the  words  of  the  sacred  author 
the  sense  which  they  bore  in  the  age  when  he  lived,  and  which 
is  agreeable  to  the  degree  of  knowledge  which  he  possessed, 
as  well  as  conformable  to  the  religion  professed  by  him,  and  to 
the  sacred  and  civil  rights  or  customs  that  obtained  when  he 
flourished." 

When,  however,  we  speak  of  the  literal  or  grammatical  sense 
of  a  word,  we  mean  no  more  than  its  primitive  meaning.  And 
when  we  speak  of  the  historical  meaning  of  a  word,  we  mean  its 
meaning  at  any  given  time.  The  figurative  meaning  of  words 
belongs  to  another  chapter. 

In  no  book  in  the  world  is  the  literal  sense  of  words  the  only 
sense ;  and  still  less  in  the  Bible.  But  no  book  in  the  world, 
either  among  the  ancients  or  the  moderns,  has  been  interpreted, 
quoted,  and  applied  so  licentiously  as  the  Bible.  Learned  and 
unlearned  have  quoted  and  applied  its  words,  as  if  its  authors 
were  outlaws  and  rebels  in  the  commonwealth  of  letters.  Some  of 
the  ancient  Jews  said  that  every  letter  in  a  word  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment had  a  special  meaning,  and  the  very  opening  of  the  mouth 
to  pronounce  them  was  significant  of  something  sacred.  The 
rabbinic  maxim  used  to  be,  and  perhaps  still  is,  "  On  every  point 
of  the  Scriptures  hang  suspended  mountains  of  sense."  The 
Talmud  says,  *'  God  bo  gave  the  law  to  Moses,  that  a  thing  can 
be  shown  to  be  clean  and  unclean  forty-nine  different  ways." 
Little  more  than  a  century  ago,  Cocceius  of  Leyden,  maintained 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  59 

that "  all  the  possible  meanings  of  a  word  are  to  be  united/' 
He  raised  a  considerable  party  upon  this  principle. 

But  an  opposite  extreme,  and  quite  as  dangerous,  into  which 
some  have  run,  is,  that  "  some  passages  of  the  Scriptures  have 
no  literal  meaning  at  all.''  If  by  this  it  were  understood  that 
some  passages  have  only  a  tropical  or  figurative  meaning,  it  might 
be  admitted  without  detriment  to  our  knowledge  of  the  will  of 
Heaven  ;  but  as  it  is  understood  by  many,  a  license  is  taken  to 
allegorize,  not  only  the  historical  part  of  both  Testaments,  but 
also  the  miracles  of  Moses,  of  Christ,  and  of  the  Apostles — the 
paradisiacal  state,  the  flood,  and  even  the  precepts  and  promises 
of  the  gospel  institution  ;  so  that  the  whole  revelation  of  God  is 
thrown  into  the  laboratory  of  every  man's  imagination,  and  the 
key  of  knowledge  for  ever  taken  from  the  people.  That  the 
words  of  the  sacred  writings  are  taken  both  literally  and 
figuratively,  as  the  words  of  all  other  books,  is  now  almost  uni- 
versally conceded  ;  and  that  the  true  sense  of  the  words  is  the 
true  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  is  daily  gaining  ground  amongst  the 
most  learned  and  skilful  interpreters :  in  one  word,  that  the 
Bible  is  not  to  be  interpreted  arbitrarily,  is  the  most  valuable 
discovery  or  concession  of  this  generation.  This,  indeed,  was 
confessed  by  our  most  distinguished  reformers.  Melancthon 
said,  "  The  Scripture  cannot  be  understood  theologically  until  it 
is  understood  grammatically."  And  Luther  affirmed  that  a 
certain  knowledge  of  Scripture  depends  only  upon  a  knowledge 
of  its  words. 

3(Z.  The  various  divisions  and  subdivisions  of  the  sacred 
Scriptures  into  chapters,  verses,  and  members  of  sentences,  are 
of  human  authority,  and  to  be  regarded  as  such.  Anciently  all 
the  books  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  were  written  in  one  continuous 
manner — ^without  a  break,  a  chapter,  or  a  verse.  The  division 
into  chapters  that  now  universally  obtains  in  Europe,  derived 
its  origin  from  Cardinal  Cairo,  who  lived  in  the  twelfth  century. 
The  subdivision  into  verses  is  of  no  older  date  than  the  middle 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  was  the  invention  of  Robert 
Stevens.  "Whatever  advantages  these  divisions  may  have  been 
in  the  way  of  facilitating  references,  they  have  so  dislocated  and 
broken  to  pieces  the  connexion,  as  not  only  to  have  given  to  the 
Scriptures  the  appearance  of  a  book  of  proverbs,  but  have  thrown 
great  difficulties  in  the  way  of  any  easy  intelligence  of  them. 
The  punctuation,  too,  being  necessarily  dependent  on  these 


'60  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

divisions,  is  far  from  accurate ;  and,  taken  altogether,  it  affords 
a  demonstration  that  there  is  no  more  divinity  in  the  chapters, 
verses,  commas,  semicolons,  colons,  and  periods  of  the  inspired 
writings,  than  there  is  in  the  paper  on  which  they  are  inscribed, 
or  in  the  ink  by  which  they  are  depicted  to  our  view. 

From  all  of  which  facts,  the  following  rule  is  of  essential  im- 
portance:— 

In  reading  the  historical  and  epistolary  parts  of  the  sacred 
writings,  begin  at  the  beginning,  and  follow  the  writer  in  the 
train  of  his  own  thoughts  and  reasonings  to  the  end  of  the 
subject  on  which  he  writes,  irrespective  of  chapters  and  verses. 
Indeed,  even  capital  letters,  punctuation — whether  commas, 
semicolons,  colons,  periods,  paragraphs,  interrogative  points, 
notes  of  admiration,  parenthesis,  dashes — must  be  regarded  as 
human  comments,  and  to  be  deliberately  considered  and  weighed 
as  but  the  opinions  of  men. 

This  rule  must  be  observed  in  all  cases  when  we  read  for 
the  sake  of  understanding  any  of  the  sacred  books  or  letters. 

4tJi.  It  must  always  be  remembered  by  him  who  would  be  a 
scribe,  well  instructed  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  that  the  whole 
Bible  comprehends  ihy-ee  distinct  dispensations  of  religion,  or 
three  different  administrations  of  mercy  to  the  human  race. 
These  are  the  Patriarchal,  Jewish,  and  Christian  ages  of  the 
world. 

There  are  three  high-priesthoods,  viz.  that  of  Melchizedek, 
that  of  Aaron,  and  that  of  Jesus  the  Messiah ;  and  under  each 
of  these  there  will  be  found  a  different  economy  of  things.  A 
knowledge  of  the  leading  peculiarities  of  each  is  essential  to  an 
accurate  knowledge  of  any  one  of  them  and  the  right  interpre- 
tation of  the  Bible. 

It  is  a  standing  maxim  in  religion,  that  the  priesthood  being 
changed,  there  is  of  necessity  a  change  of  the  law  pertaining  to 
acceptable  worship. 

After  the  close  of  one  dispensation  and  the  commencement  of 
a  new  one,  no  man  could  be  accepted  in  his  approaches  to  God 
"by  the  preceding  economy.  Moses,  nor  Aaron,  nor  the  people 
of  the  Jews,  after  they  departed  from  Sinai,  dare  approach  God 
by  sacrifice — as  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  were  wont  to  do. 

The  sovereignty  and  wisdom  of  God  are  most  conspicuous  in 
these  arrangements.  But  it  is  our  present  duty  only  to  say, 
that  before  wc  can  feel  any  confidence  in  our  interpretations  of 
any  law,  commandment,  or  institution  of  religion,  a  previous 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  61 

question  must  always  be  decided — viz.  To  what  dispensation  did 
it  belong  ? 

5th.  We  shall  now  conclude  this  summary  view  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  interpretation,  by  stating  in  order  seven  general  rules 
of  interpretation  of  primary  importance,  deduced  from  the  pre- 
ceding reflections : — 

Rule  I.  On  opening  any  book  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  con- 
sider first  the  historical  circumstances  of  the  book.  These  are 
the  order,  the  title,  the  author,  the  date,  the  place,  and  the  occa- 
sion of  it. 

II.  In  examining  the  contents  of  any  book,  as  respects  pre- 
cepts, promises,  exhortations,  &c.,  observe  who  it  is  that  speaks, 
and  under  what  dispensation  he  ofl&ciates.  Is  he  a  Patriarch,  a 
Jew,  or  a  Christian  ?  Consider  also  the  persons  addressed — ■ 
their  prejudices,  characters,  and  religious  relations.  Are  they 
Jews  or  Christians — believers  or  unbelievers — approved  or  dis- 
approved ?  This  rule  is  essential  to  the  proper  application  of 
every  command,  promise,  threatening,  admonition,  or  exhorta- 
tion, in  the  Old  Testament  or  New. 

III.  To  understand  the  meaning  of  what  is  commanded,  pro- 
mised, taught,  &c.,  the  same  philological  principles,  deduced 
from  the  nature  of  language,  or  the  same  laws  of  interpretation 
which  are  applied  to  the  language  of  other  books,  are  to  be  ap- 
plied to  the  language  of  the  Bible. 

IV.  Common  usage,  which  can  only  be  ascertained  by  testi- 
mony, must  always  decide  the  meaning  of  any  word  which  has 
but  one  signification ;  but  when  words  have,  according  to  testi- 
mony— (i.  e.  the  Dictionary) — more  meanings  than  one,  whether 
literal  or  figurative,  the  scope,  the  context,  or  parallel  passages 
must  decide  the  meaning ;  for  if  common  usage,  the  design  of 
the  writer,  the  context,  and  parallel  passages  fail,  there  can  be 
no  certainty  in  the  interpretation  of  language. 

V.  In  all  tropical  language,  ascertain  the  point  of  resem- 
blance, and  judge  of  the  nature  of  the  trope,  and  its  kind,  from 
the  point  of  resemblance. 

VI.  In  the  interpretation  of  symbols,  types,  allegories,  and 
parables,  this  rule  is  supreme.  Ascertain  the  point  to  be  illus- 
trated; for  comparison  is  never  to  be  extended  beyond  that 
point — to  all  the  attributes,  qualities,  or  circumstances  of  the 
symbol,  type,  allegory,  or  parable. 

VII.  For  the  salutary  and  sanctifying  intelligence  of  the  ora- 
cles of  God,  the  following  rule  is  indispensable : —  We  must  come 
within  the  understanding  distance. 

There  is  a  distance  which  is  properly  called  the  speaking  dis- 
tance, or  the  hearing  distance,  beyond  which  the  voice  reaches 


^2  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

not,  and  the  ear  hears  not.  To  hear  another,  we  must  come 
within  that  circle  which  the  voice  audibly  fills. 

Now  we  may  with  propriety  say,  that  as  it  respects  God,  there 
is  an  understanding  distance.  All  beyond  that  distance  cannot 
understand  God ;  all  within  it  can  easily  understand  him  in  all 
matters  of  piety  and  morality.  God  himself  is  the  centre  of 
that  circle,  and  humility  is  its  circumference. 

The  wisdom  of  God  is  as  evident  in  adapting  the  light  of  the 
Sun  of  Righteousness  to  our  spiritual  vision,  as  in  adjusting  the 
light  of  day  to  our  eyes.  The  light  reaches  us  without  an  effort 
of  our  own ;  but  we  must  open  our  eyes ;  and  if  our  eyes  be 
sound,  we  enjoy  the  natural  light  of  heaven.  There  is  a  sound 
eye  in  reference  to  spiritual,  as  well  as  in  reference  to  material 
light.  Now,  while  the  philological  principles  and  rules  of  inter- 
pretation enable  many  men  to  be  skilful  in  biblical  criticism,  and 
in  the  interpretation  of  words  and  sentences,  who  neither  per- 
ceive nor  admire  the  things  represented  by  those  words,  the 
sound  eye  contemplates  the  things  themselves,  and  is  ravished 
with  the  spiritual  and  divine  scenes  which  the  Bible  unfolds. 

The  moral  soundness  of  vision  consists  in  having  the  eyes  of 
the  understanding  fixed  solely  on  God  himself,  his  approbation, 
and  complacent  affection  for  us.  It  is  sometimes  called  a  single 
eye,  because  it  looks  for  one  thing  supremely.  Every  one,  then, 
who  opens  the  Book  of  God  with  one  aim,  with  one  ardent  de- 
sire, intent  only  to  know  the  will  of  God — to  such  a  person,  the 
knowledge  of  God  is  easy ;  for  the  Bible  is  framed  to  illuminate 
such,  and  only  such,  with  the  salutary  knowledge  of  things 
spiritual  and  divine. 

Humility  of  mind,  or  what  is  in  effect  the  same,  contempt  for 
all  earth-born  pre-eminence,  prepares  the  mind  for  the  reception 
of  this  light,  or,  what  is  virtually  the  same,  opens  the  ears  to 
hear  the  voice  of  God.  Amidst  the  din  of  all  the  arguments  of 
the  flesh,  the  world,  and  Satan,  a  person  is  so  deaf  that  he  can- 
not hear  the  still  small  voice  of  God's  philanthropy.  But  re- 
ceding from  pride,  covetousness,  and  false  ambition — from  the 
love  of  the  world — and  coming  within  that  circle,  the  circum- 
ference of  which  is  unfeigned  humility,  and  the  centre  of  which 
is  God  himself,— the  voice  of  God  is  distinctly  heard  and  clearly 
understood.  All  within  this  circle  are  taught  by  God — all  with- 
out it  are  under  the  influence  of  the  wicked  one.  "God  resist- 
eth  the  proud,  but  he  giveth  grace  to  the  humble." 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  65 

He,  then,  that  would  interpret  the  oracles  of  God  to  the  salva- 
tion of  his  soul,  must  approach  this  volume  with  the  humility 
and  docility  of  a  child,  and  meditate  upon  it  day  and  night. 
Like  Mary,  he  must  sit  at  the  Master's  feet,  and  listen  to  the 
words  which  fall  from  his  lips.  To  such  an  one  there  is  an 
assurance  of  understanding,  a  certainty  of  knowledge,  to  which 
the  man  of  letters  alone  never  attained,  and  which  the  mere 
critic  never  felt. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


The  Book  of  God  is  addressed  to  the  human  understanding. 
It  assumes  that  man,  though  fallen  and  depraved,  is  yet  an  in- 
telligent being — that  he  has  certain  faculties  or  powers  of  ascer- 
taining truth,  of  perceiving  and  receiving  evidence.  It  does 
not,  indeed,  inform  him  that  he  has  the  faculty  of  seeing,  hear- 
ing, speaking,  or  believing.  It  does  not  explain  to  him  that  the 
possession  of  a  faculty  or  power  to  do  any  thing,  makes  it  his 
duty  to  employ  that  faculty  or  power  in  any  way  that  his  Cre- 
ator may  require.  But  it  addresses  him  as  though  these  were 
matters  perfectly  understood  and  agreed  upon  between  his  Creator 
and  himself. 

Some,  in  their  speculative  philosophy,  have  called  these  things 
in  question,  and  have  created  doubts  where  none  ever  before 
existed.  Hence  we  sometimes  find  men  doubting  whether  there 
be  such  a  faculty  as  faith  amongst  the  mental  faculties  or  powers 
of  man.  Philologists,  indeed,  say,  that  the  term  faculty  indi- 
cates power  or  ability  to  do  any  thing ;  and  Christian  philoso- 
phers say,  that  man  has  just  as  much  power  to  believe  testi- 
mony as  he  has  to  reason,  to  hear,  or  to  speak.  If,  then,  any 
confidence  can  be  due  to  such  authorities,  we  may  say  that  man, 
as  a  human  being,  has  the  faculty  of  speaking,  hearing,  reason- 
ing, and  believing — as  naturally  as  he  has  the  faculty  of  seeing, 
tasting,  or  feeling.  We  may  advance  one  step  farther,  and  say, 
that  speaking  and  hearing  are  both  useless  endowments — that 
they  are  faculties  of  no  value,  if  we  have  not  the  faculty  of 


64  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

believing  what  is  spoken,  or  of  ascertaining  the  truth  of  what  is 
heard.  Indeed,  all  sound,  discriminating  thinkers  must  regard 
the  faculties  of  speaking,  hearing,  and  believing,  as  necessarily 
and  essentially  related  to  one  another ;  so  that  any  one  of  them 
implies  the  other  two.  Why  should  man  have  the  faculty  of 
speech,  if  his  neighbour  had  not  the  faculty  of  hearing  ?  And 
why  should  he  have  the  faculty  of  hearing,  and  reasoning  upon 
what  is  heard,  if  he  have  not  the  faculty  of  believing  what  is 
true  ?  Light,  then,  does  not  more  obviously  exist  for  the  eye, 
and  music  for  the  ear,  than  speech  for  hearing,  and  hearing  for 
faith.  Well  did  Paul,  therefore,  reason  when  he  said,  "Faith 
comes  by  hearing,  and  hearing,  from  the  (speech  or)  word  of 
God."  We,  therefore,  conclude  that  God  never  would  have 
spoken  to  man,  if  man  could  not  hear  him ;  and  that  man  never 
would  have  heard  his  word  if  he  could  not  believe  what  God 
said  to  him.  The  fact,  then,  that  God  has  given  to  the  world  a 
revelation,  is,  with  me,  a  demonstration  that  man  has  the  power 
to  believe  it — provided  only,  his  heart  and  attention  are  devoted 
to  it.  It  is  an  intelligible,  veritable,  and  credible  document, 
worthy  of  God  as  its  author,  and  of  man  as  its  object. 

Both  oral  and  written  testimony  are  addressed  to  our  reason ; 
for,  although  the  written  testimony  is  designed  for  the  eye,  and 
the  oral  testimony  for  the  ear,  both  are  addressed  to  our  reason — 
to  our  power  of  discriminating  the  characters  of  truth  from  those 
of  falsehood.  There  is  in  this  also  a  sort  of  tacit  agreement  or 
understanding  between  the  parties — as  much  as  there  is  between 
two  persons  speaking  the  same  vernacular,  in  the  use  and 
meaning  of  the  words  and  phrases,  of  the  tones  and  gestures 
employed  in  their  intercommunications  with  one  another. 

Kevelation,  though  originally  the  form  of  oral  testimony,  is 
now  altogether  in  the  form  of  a  written  record.  It  is  in  this 
form,  indeed,  still  more  circumstantially  addressed  to  our  rea- 
son and  our  faith.  The  meaning  of  its  language  and  the  truth 
of  its  developments  are  alike  to  bo  ascertained  by  the  faculties 
to  which  they  are  conjointly  addressed.  It  always  proceeds 
upon  the  assumption  that,  unless  it  is  understood,  it  cannot  be 
believed  ;  and  tliat,  unless  it  is  Ijclicved,  it  can  exert  no  salutary 
influence  upon  our  hearts  or  our  lives. 

To  admit  the  testimony  to  be  true  is,  in  the  sacred  style,  equi- 
valent to  believing  it ;  for  he  that  believeth  the  testimony  of  God 
has  simply  "  sot  to  his  seal  that  God  is  true."     Faith,  indeed,  is 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  65 

always  but  the  conviction  of  the  truth  of  testimony,  whether 
that  testimony  be  human  or  divine.  To  be  convinced  that  any 
testimony  or  report  is  true,  is  to  believe  it ;  to  be  convinced  that 
it  is  not  true,  is  to  disbelieve  it ;  not  to  be  able  to  decide,  is  to 
doubt.  Hence,  there  are  but  three  distinct  states  of  mind,  as 
respects  testimony.     We  believe,  disbelieve,  or  doubt  it. 

Of  all  the  endowments  vouchsafed  to  man,  that  of  faith  is  su- 
perlatively excellent.  To  this  faculty  he  owes  all  that  knowledge 
that  ennobles  and  exalts  him  in  the  scale  of  being.  The  range 
and  acquisitions  of  his  five  senses  are  as  nothing,  compared  with 
the  domains  of  faith.  The  area  of  faith  is  wider  than  the  earth, 
broader  than  the  sea,  extending  through  all  time,  and  launching 
into  an  indefinite  eternity,  past  and  future.  By  faith,  we  com- 
mune with  all  the  living,  and  with  all  the  dead  whose  deeds  of 
renown  have  been  inscribed  upon  the  rolls  of  time.  Ages  past 
and  gone  are  ever  present  with  us — empires,  that  have  long  since 
fallen,  still  stand  before  us — cities,  palaces,  and  temples,  that, 
ages  since,  have  mouldered  down  to  dust,  arise  from  their  ruins 
and  display  to  us  the  science  and  skill,  the  genius  and  taste,  the 
pride  and  superstition  of  their  founders  and  architects.  By  faith 
in  human  testimony,  the  experience  of  ages  is  brought  home  to 
us  and  made  subordinate  to  our  wants  and  our  wishes.  By  it 
we  may  be  said  to  have  lived  before  we  were  born — to  have 
communed  with  the  men  of  all  ages  and  nations — to  have  been 
contemporaries  with  all  the  generations  of  men. 

By  faith  in  divine  testimony,  we  know  how  the  universe  was 
made — how  worlds  began  to  be — how  space  sprang  from  nothing, 
and  how  it  has  been  possessed  with  its  unnumbered  tenantry  of 
worlds.  By  it  we  see  the  first  man  springing  out  of  the  dust  at 
the  bidding  of  his  Almighty  Maker,  blushing  into  life  in  his 
immediate  presence,  and  receiving  a  holy  spirit  from  the  life- 
inspiring  voice  of  his  Father  and  his  God.  By  it  we  see  him 
wrapped  in  a  mystic  sleep,  and  the  hand  of  God  dislocating  a 
rib  near  his  heart,  which  he  moulds,  after  the  image  of  love, 
into  incarnate  beauty,  and  presents  to  Adam  as  a  companion 
meet  for  such  a  man  as  he. 

Faith,  also,  illuminated  by  the  same  bright  Sun  of  Eternity, 
gifts  man  with  the  prospective  visions  of  times  and  ages  yet 
unborn.  It  presents,  to  the  enraptured  vision  of  the  saint, 
Adam  and  Eve,  with  all  their  redeemed  progeny,  ransomed  from 
the  grave;  emerging,  phoenix-like,  from  the  ashes  of  an  old 


Hi  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

world ;  or,  Eve-like,  rising  in  immortal  beauty  and  loveliness 
from  the  opened  side  of  the  second  Adam,  making  their  sublime 
entry,  amidst  the  acclamations  of  the  celestial  choristers,  into 
new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  especially  prepared  for  them. 
Truly,  then,  may  we  not  say  with  Paul,  that  "  faith  is  the  confi- 
dent expectation  of  things  hoped  for,  and  the  conviction  (or  evi- 
dence) of  things  not  seen  V 

But  the  sublime  nature,  ineffable  utility,  and  importance  of 
faith  are  not  to  be  learned  from  a  survey  of  its  widespread  and 
long-enduring  dominion  over  time,  space,  and  eternity ;  but 
from  a  strict  attention  to  the  place  it  now  occupies  in  the  world 
and  in  the  church  of  God,  in  the  present  employments,  charac- 
ter, and  destiny  of  man.  Be  it  observed,  then,  that  all  the 
faculties  of  man  have  a  present  specific  use  and  importance  in 
the  full  development  of  himself,  in  the  formation  of  such  a 
character  as  he  should  rationally  desire  to  possess  to  all  eter- 
nity, and  in  qualifying  him  to  fill  his  own  space  in  the  world,  in 
the  performance  of  those  functions  and  the  discharge  of  those 
duties  which  will  avail  to  the  interests  and  happiness  of  the 
world. 

Every  faculty  of  man  has  its  proper  object  and  its  proper  use. 
Has  he  the  faculty  of  vision  ?  There  are  objects  to  be  seen,  and 
advantages  to  be  gained  from  seeing  them.  Has  he  the  faculty 
of  hearing  ?  There  are  the  harmonies  and  the  melodies  of  na- 
ture and  of  the  human  voice  to  be  heard  and  to  be  enjoyed. 
Has  he  the  faculty  of  reasoning?  There  are  objects  to  be  com- 
pared, and  conclusions  of  practical  utility  to  be  deduced  from 
them.  Has  he  the  faculty  of  believing  ?  There  is  the  testimony 
of  men,  and  there  is  the  testimony  of  God,  to  be  believed  and 
appropriated.  Now,  as  this  is  the  noblest  faculty  which  man 
possesses,  conversant  with  things  past,  present,  and  future,  proxi- 
mate and  remote,  God  has  ordained  that  he  shall  walk  by  faith, 
physically,  intellectually,  and  morally.  Hence  man  is  obliged 
to  walk  through  his  whole  life  more  by  faith  than  by  his  five 
senses,  his  own  observations,  or  his  own  experience — probably 
more  than  by  these  all  combined.  This  being  a  very  funda- 
mental fact,  we  shall  be  at  some  pains  to  develope  it. 

The  infimt  man  enters  life  more  helpless  than  any  animal  with 
whose  history  wc  are  acquainted.  He  has  not  instinct  sufficient 
for  the  first  effort  essential  to  life,  health,  or  comfort.  He  is  as 
destitute  of  reason,  observation,  and  experience,  as  of  instinct, 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  67 

to  guide  him  in  the  pursuit  of  what  is  essential  to  his  animal 
existence.  God  has  made  him  dependent  upon  the  care,  direc- 
tion, and  counsel  of  his  mother  or  his  nurse,  in  the  very  first 
steps^  of  life's  pilgrimage.  He  must  walk  by  faith  in  the  arti- 
cles of  food  and  medicine,  and  all  physical  safety.  He  cannot 
walk  by  reason,  for  as  yet  he  has  it  not.  He  cannot  walk  by 
his  own  experience,  for  he  has  acquired  none.  He  cannot  walk 
by  instinct,  for  that  was  not  imparted  to  him.  He  is,  therefore, 
under  an  insuperable  necessity  to  walk  by  faith  as  respects  food, 
medicine,  poison,  and  all  surrounding  dangers  from  fire,  flood, 
or  tempest.  If  he  believe  not  on  the  testimony  of  others  that 
medicine  will  cure,  that  poison  will  kill,  that  fire  will  burn,  and 
that  water  will  drown,  he  must  pay  the  penalty  and  sufier  for 
his  unbelief.  More  destitute  of  instinct  and  of  defence  than  the 
oyster  or  the  lobster,  he  must  not  be  left  to  his  own  guidance  or 
guardianship.  He  must  not  be  permitted  to  experiment  with 
the  serpent,  the  young  lion,  or  with  the  poisons,  animal  and 
vegetable,  with  which  the  earth  abounds.  The  law  of  nature  is 
as  imperious  and  universal  as  the  law  of  the  gospel.  If  the 
gospel  says,  "  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned,'' — the  law 
of  man's  natural  existence  says,  '  If  lie  believe  not  his  mother  or 
his  nurse,  he  must  die.'- 

But  it  is  not  in  the  nursery  only  that  the  infant  man  is  trained 
to  walk  by  faith.  He  enters  the  primary  school  under  the  same 
imperious  law.  The  primer  is  put  into  his  hand.  He  opens  it, 
and  looks  at  the  letters  of  the  alphabet ;  but  neither  knows  their 
name  nor  their  sound.  He  might  look  at  them  for  a  thousand 
years,  and  neither  know  the  name  nor  the  sound  of  the  first 
letter.  But,  by  faith  in  his  teacher,  he  learns  the  names  and 
the  sounds  of  them  all.  By  the  same  principle,  he  learns  the 
art  and  mystery  of  reading  his  own  mother's  language.  Does 
he  desire  the  science  of  numbers,  or  that  of  magnitudes  ?  He 
is  equally  obliged  to  walk  by  faith  either  in  the  written  testi- 
mony or  in  the  verbal  explanation  of  a  teacher.  Does  he  desire 
to  learn  ancient  or  foreign  language — to  distil  sweetness  and 
pleasure  from  Greek  and  Roman  springs  ?  Then  must  he  re- 
pose implicit  faith  in  his  lexicographer,  and  believe  him  in  every 
definition  of  verb  and  noun. 

Having  passed  through  the  nursery  training  and  discipline  by 
faith,  having  also  advanced  through  the  primary  and  high-school 
education  under  the  guidance  and  supremacy  of  the  same  uni- 


is?  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

versal  law,  does  he  desire  to  take  his  place  as  a  free  agent  on 
the  active  theatre  of  life  ?  Does  he  become  a  merchant,  a  me- 
chanic, an  agriculturist  ?  He  is  still  to  walk  by  the  same  rule, 
and  to  be  governed  by  the  same  stern  necessity.  Beliete  he 
must  in  those  who  have  gone  before  him  in  every  calling  and 
department  of  life.  He  has  to  buy  and  sell,  to  barter  and  ex- 
change the  products  of  his  own  labour,  or  the  products  of  other 
men's  labour,  by  faith  in  human  testimony.  In  receiving  a  shil- 
ling, a  guinea,  an  eagle,  a  bank-bill,  a  bill  of  exchange,  a  draft, 
he  must  act  by  faith  as  to  their  genuineness,  their  value  at  a 
given  time  and  at  a  given  place.  All  of  which  depends  upon 
the  testimony  of  others.  In  paying  or  in  receiving  payments,  he 
acts  by  the  same  principle  and  obeys  the  same  law.  Even  the 
weights  and  measures  by  which  he  buys  and  sells  are  to  him 
almost  universally  matters  of  testimony  and  faith.  What  need 
have  we  of  farther  witness  ?  In  natural  and  social  life,  in  the 
nursery  and  at  school,  in  the  active  business  and  pursuits  of 
life,  men  are  compelled  in  all  cases  first,  and  in  most  cases 
always,  to  walk  by  faith.  Their  own  senses,  observation,  and 
experience,  in  process  of  time,  guide  them  in  co-operation  with 
testimony  and  faith ;  but  these  first  lead  the  way  and  continue 
our  chief  guides  through  all  the  great  concerns  of  life  ! 

Why,  then,  should  it  be  otherwise  as  respects  things  unseen, 
spiritual  and  eternal?  Here,  indeed,  we  must  "walk  by  faith, 
and  not  by  sight.''  But  the  skeptic  and  the  infidel  have  no  rea- 
son to  reject  the  gospel,  or  deny  the  Bible,  because  it  imparts 
its  blessings  only  through  faith.  Nature,  society,  and  the  gos- 
pel bear  equally  impressed  upon  them  the  characteristic  marks 
of  the  same  great  original.  If  man,  in  things  temporal  and 
with  respect  to  his  present  life,  walks  by  faith,  why  should  it  be 
thought  incredible  that  God  would  have  him  to  walk  by  faith  in 
things  spiritual  and  with  respect  to  an  eternal  life  ?  The  condi- 
tions of  spiritual  and  eternal  life  are,  in  this  all-important  fea- 
ture, the  same.  He  that  belicveth  not  must  perish,  is  equally 
true  as  respects  both. 

The  gospel  assumes  that  which  Christian  and  infidel  must 
equally  admit ; — that  mankind  are  accustomed  to  walk  by  faith 
in  all  the  important  concerns  of  this  life.  It,  therefore,  very 
rationally  addresses  itself  to  this  faculty  in  addressing  man.  It 
proposes  to  him  no  new  principle.  It  speaks  in  harmony  with 
the  presiding  genius  of  his  own  nature.    It  submits  to  him  clear 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  69 

and  ample  testimony  in  proof  of  all  that  it  demands  and  of  all 
that  it  promises.  Its  language  is, — "If  we  receive  the  testi- 
mony of  men,  the  testimony  of  God  is  greater."  If  men's  words 
may  be  relied  on,  how  much  more  the  word  of  God ! 

Great  virtue  and  power  are  attached  to  the  faith  of  the  gos- 
pel. Some,  however,  ascribe  this  efl&cacy  rather  to  the  manner 
of  believing  it,  than  to  the  truth  which  is  believed.  There  are 
some  very  popular  mistakes  upon  this  subject.  Some  imagine 
that  there  are  several  ways  of  believing  testimony,  or  of  assent- 
ing to  evidence.  This  is,  however,  a  very  great  error,  and  of 
injurious  tendency.  There  is  but  one  way  of  believing  any  testi- 
mony, human  or  divine ;  and  that  is,  to  admit  it  to  be  true.  He 
that  admits  any  testimony  to  be  true,  believes  it ;  and  no  be- 
liever can  do  more  than  admit  the  truth  of  a  witness.  There 
are,  indeed,  or  may  be,  different  degrees  of  clearness  and  cer- 
tainty in  the  evidence  adduced  in  any  case ;  and  hence  there  are, 
or  may  be,  as  many  different  degrees  of  conviction  or  assurance 
of  the  truth  of  it.  Hence  faith  is  strong  or  weak,  in  the  ratio 
of  the  clearness  and  force  of  the  testimony  adduced.  But  the 
clearness  and  force  of  testimony  is  not  necessarily  innate  in  the 
words  or  manner  of  the  witness ;  but  much  depends  upon  the 
discrimination  and  clearness  of  perception,  as  well  as  upon  the 
candour  of  the  believer,  in  appreciating  the  clearness  and  force 
of  the  testimony  adduced.  It  is,  therefore,  essential  to  strong 
and  vigorous  belief  in  any  thing,  that  the  testimony  be  clear 
and  forcible  in  itself,  and  that  it  be  clearly  perceived  and  fully 
comprehended  by  the  believer.  It  follows,  then,  that  there  are 
not  several  ways  of  believing ;  but  that  there  may  be  different 
degrees  of  evidence,  and  that  one  person  may  more  clearly  and 
satisfactorily  believe  than  another.  The  head,  the  heart,  the 
will,  the  conscience  are  all  simultaneously  exercised  in  the  act 
of  believing  in  order  to  justification.  The  head  alone  believes 
nothing.  Nor  does  the  heart,  the  will,  the  conscience  alone  be- 
lieve any  thing.  The  understanding  simply  discerns  truth,  the 
conscience  recognises  authority,  the  heart  feels  love,  the  will 
yields  to  requisition.  The  gospel  engages,  interests,  allures, 
captivates  the  enlightened  sinner.  So  that,  "with  his  heart," 
his  whole  soul,  "he  believes  to  righteousness,  and  with  his  mouth 
he  confesses  to  salvation." 

Some  superficial  thinkers  have  spoken  and  written  much  upon 
different  kinds  of  faith.     They  have  "historical"  and  "saving 


70  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

faith,"  the  "faith  of  miracles,"  and  the  "faith  of  devils,"  the 
"faith  direct  and  reflex,"  "temporary  and  enduring  faith,"  &c. 
&c.  These  are  conceits  of  the  old  metaphysical  theologians, 
and  have  done  a  world  of  mischief.  By  placing  historical  and 
saving  or  divine  faith  in  contrast,  and  in  giving  all  value  to 
saving  and  none  to  historical  belief,  they  have  bewildered  them- 
selves and  their  followers : — 

"  Faith  was  bewildered  much  by  men  who  meant 
To  make  it  clear,  so  simple.in  itself, 
A  thought  so  rudimental  and  so  plain. 
That  none  by  comment  could  it  plainer  make. 
All  faith  was  one.    In  object,  not  in  kind. 
The  difference  lay.    The  faith  that  saved  a  soul, 
And  that  which  in  the  common  truth  believed, 
In  essence,  were  the  same.    Hear,  then,  what  faith, 
True,  Christian  faith,  which  brought  salvation,  was: — 
Belief  in  all  that  God  revealed  to  men ; 
Observe,  in  all  that  God  revealed  to  men, 
In  all  he  promised,  threatened,  commanded,  said, 
Without  exception,  and  without  a  doubt." 

There  is  no  faith  worth  any  thing  that  is  not  historical ;  for  all 
our  religion  is  founded  upon  history.  What  would  any  Jew  or 
Christian  have  believed  concerning  Moses  or  Jesus,  but  for  the 
history  of  those  persons  ?  Is  there  any  man  under  the  broad 
heavens  who  believes  in  Moses  or  in  Jesus,  who  has  not  first  heard 
of  the  Lawgiver  and  the  Saviour  from  history,  oral  or  written  ? 
Not  one.  But  there  are  those  who  believe  in  Moses  and  in  Jesus 
on  mere  human  tradition,  without  any  correct  knowledge  of  the 
history ;  and  there  are  those  who  believe  on  Moses  and  on  Jesus 
on  the  proper  evidence  ;  but  they  have  such  views  of  Moses  and 
of  Jesus  as  render  their  faith  of  no  value.  They  hold  opinions 
and  views  of  these  persons  that  make  them  mere  shadows  or 
ideal  personages.  Our  Saviour  told  certain  Jews  that  believed 
in  Moses,  as  they  alleged,  that  had  they  "believed  Moses,  they 
would  have  believed  him ;"  hut  not  having  believed  the  writings 
of  Moses,  they  could  not  believe  his  words. 

Multitudes  believe  something  concerning  Jesus  the  Messiah 
on  mere  national  or  human  authority  and  prescription,  who 
have  not  one  distinct  real  conception  or  apprehension  of  him ; 
and,  consequently,  "  he  will  not  commit  himself  to  them." 
Many  in  Jerusalem,  while  he  was  there,  like  Nicodemus  when 
first  he  visited  him,  believed  in  him ;  to  whom,  wo  are  told,  ho 
would  not  commit  himself,  because  he  knew  what  mistakes  and 


ANTECEDENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  71 

misconceptions  they  entertained  concerning  him.  The  whole 
history  must  be  clearly  understood  and  cordially  received  in  its 
true  sense  and  on  its  divine  evidence,  as  demonstrated  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  before  any  one  can,  in  strict  propriety,  be  said  to 
believe  it.  All  who  thus  believe  it,  will  find  that  it  is  both  the 
wisdom  and  power  of  God  to  salvation. 

But  the  power  and  efficacy  of  faith  depend  not  so  much  upon 
the  act  or  manner  of  believing,  nor  upon  the  certainty  of  the 
evidence,  nor  even  upon  our  assurance  of  its  truth,  as  upon  the 
nature  and  value  of  the  thing  that  is  believed.  The  power  of 
FAITH  IS  IN  THE  TRUTH  BELIEVED.  The  powcr  of  faith  is  in 
the  power  of  truth.  It  is  not  eating  that  sustains  or  destroys 
human  life.  It  is  what  is  eaten.  Some  eat  and  live — others  eat 
and  die.  Some  believe  and  are  saved — others  believe  and  are 
damned.  Both  characters  truly  and  sincerely  believe.  But  the 
former  believe  the  truth  and  are  saved — the  latter  believe  a  lie 
and  are  damned.  So  true  it  is,  that  it  is  not  the  manner  of  be- 
lieving that  saves  or  destroys,  nor  the  sincerity  of  believing; 
but  the  meaning  or  nature  of  that  which  is  believed.  *'  God," 
says  Paul,  sends  to  some  "  a  strong  delusion ;"  or  allows  them 
to  receive  a  strong  delusion,  so  "  that  they  may  believe  a  lie'* 
and  be  condemned ;  while  to  others  he  sends  the  truth  with 
power,  that  they  may  believe  and  be  saved.  Some  believe  fatally, 
yet  sincerely — indeed  all,  who  believe  an  error  or  a  falsehood. 
Some,  indeed,  prefer  to  believe  a  pleasing  and  agreeable  false- 
hood rather  than  an  unsavoury  or  disagreeable  truth.  Hence 
some  really  love  darkness,  while  others  love  the  light  and  the 
truth. 

It  is  highly  important  that  this  great  proposition  be  somewhat 
elaborated  and  demonstrated; — that  salvation  is  not  in  the  act 
of  believing,  but  in  the  object  or  proposition  that  is  believed.  It  is 
the  object  of  faith,  and  not  faith  itself,  that  has  the  power  to 
Bave.  If  we  examine  our  physical,  intellectual,  and  moral  con- 
stitution, in  all  their  organs,  faculties,  and  capacities,  one  by 
one,  we  shall  find  that  it  is  neither  the  possession  of  them  nor 
the  employment  of  them  that  affords  us  health,  safety  or  happi- 
ness ;  but  the  objects  on  which  they  are  employed.  It  is  not 
the  eye,  nor  the  act  of  seeing,  that  affords  us  pleasure  or  pain. 
It  is  the  thing  seen.  It  is  not  the  ear,  nor  the  act  of  hearing, 
but  the  thing  heard,  that  soothes  or  irritates.  So  of  the  organs 
of  tasting,  smelling,  feeling.    The  pleasures  of  sense,  derived 


72  ANTECEDENTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

from  tastes,  odours,  and  contacts,  are  not  in  the  senses  or  organs 
themselves,  nor  in  the  operations  of  the  organs,  but  in  the 
objects  on  which  these  senses  act. 

The  same  universal  lavsr  obtains  in  the  intellectual  and  moral 
departments  of  our  nature.  It  is  not  the  faculty  of  perception, 
reflection,  comparison,  or  memory — or  the  employment  of  these 
faculties ;  but  the  things  perceived,  reflected  upon,  compared, 
imagined,  or  remembered,  that  afibrd  us  either  pleasure  or  pain. 
So  of  all  the  afiections  and  passions.  We  love  and  we  hate,  we 
admire  and  adore  with  pleasure  or  pain,  according  to  the  ob- 
jects. And  were  we  to  adopt  the  new  philosophy  of  fifty  organs 
in  the  human  head,  and  of  as  many  faculties,  called  acquisitive- 
ness, cautiousness,  &c.  &c.,  we  should  find  the  same  law  without 
a  single  exception.  If,  then,  the  faculty  of  faith,  or  the  opera- 
tion of  faith,  has  any  power  to  bless,  to  animate  with  hope,  to 
justify,  to  sanctify,  to  regenerate,  or  to  save,  that  power  is 
neither  in  the  faculty,  in  the  act,  nor  operation,  but  in  the  ob- 
ject on  which  it  terminates. 

Still,  the  objects  subjected  to  the  faculties  of  man, — whether 
sensitive,  intellectual,  or  moral, — can  afi'ord  him  neither  pleasure 
nor  pain,  unless  apprehended  and  appropriated  by  the  faculties 
to  which  they  severally  belong.  The  richest,  most  variegated, 
and  beautiful  landscape  in  nature — the  most  majestic  and 
sublime  operations  of  the  divine  hand  in  heaven  or  earth,  afford 
no  pleasure  to  the  eye  unless  viewed  and  contemplated  by  that 
organ.  The  most  rapturous  harmonies  and  melodies  of  nature 
or  of  art  afford  no  pleasure  unless  listened  to  and  heard.  In 
vain  the  aromatic  shrubs  and  fragrant  flowers  of  the  garden 
pour  their  delicious  odours  into  the  bosom  of  gentle  zephyrs,  to  be 
wafted  to  our  nostrils,  if  we  inhale  them  not.  So  the  rich  pro- 
visions of  Almighty  love,  displayed  to  man  in  a  thousand  ways, 
but  consummated  beyond  our  powers  of  thought  and  utterance  in 
the  gift  of  eternal  youth,  beauty,  and  loveliness  to  fallen  man, 
through  the  incarnation  of  the  everlasting  Word — the  sufferings 
unto  death  of  his  only  begotten  and  infinitely  beloved  Son — and 
through  the  sanctification  of  his  Holy  Spirit,— unless  appre- 
hended and  appropriated  by  faith,  can  neither  fill  the  soul  with 
heavenly  peace,  and  joy,  and  love,  nor  give  to  man  the  victory 
over  death,  the  grave,  and  Satan.  Hence,  by  a  figure  of  speech 
which  puts  the  instrument  for  the  agent,  salvation  is  ascribed  to 
faith,  while  it  virtually  belongs  to  the  sacrifice  and  intercession 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  73 

of  the  Messiah.  The  gospel,  then,  as  ministered  now  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  is  "  the  power  of  God  for  salvation  to  every  one 
that  believes  it."  Faith,  indeed,  is  but  the  hand  that  apprehends 
and  appropriates  Christ  as  revealed  to  us  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
sent  down  from  heaven.  Salvation,  then,  is  of  faith,  that  it 
might  be  by  grace.  For  as  the  hand  that  plucks  the  fruit  is 
not  the  fruit,  is  not  that  which  either  creates  or  sustains  life, 
but  only  that  which  ministers  to  its  development  and  preserva- 
tion— so  faith's  sublime  efficacy  is  not  in  itself,  but  in  that 
which  it  receives  and  appropriates  to  the  soul  of  man,  in  which 
alone  is  the  spring  and  fountain  of  eternal  life. 

Having  now,  as  we  hope,  clearly  ascertained  the  necessity, 
utility,  and  value  of  faith  in  the  Christian  institution,  it  is  ex- 
pedient that  we  also  ascertain,  if  possible,  that  great  central 
proposition  in  the  Christian  system  which  gives  to  faith  all  its 
sovereignty  over  the  heart,  and  soul,  and  life  of  man.  It  were 
of  little  value  to  the  sick  and  dying  could  we  convince  them 
that  all  medicinal  efficacy  was  in  a  certain  specific  remedy,  and 
not  in  the  act  of  receiving  it  into  the  system ;  and  yet  withhold 
from  them  a  revelation  of  that  sovereign  specific. 

There  is,  then,  but  one  remedial  system,  for  sin  and  sinners, 
in  this  universe.  There  never  can  be  but  one  such  system 
under  a  government  of  perfect  wisdom,  of  immaculate  holiness, 
of  inflexible  justice,  of  inviolate  truth,  and  of  infinite  mercy. 
That  one  only  omnipotent  remedy — though  composed  of  many 
mysterious  and  sublime  elements,  displayed  in  the  wonderful 
facts  of  Messiah's  life,  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension  into 
heaven — is  nevertheless  all  concentrated  in  the  form  of  one 
proposition,  on  the  faith  and  intelligence  of  which  is  suspended 
instrumentally  the  salvation  of  any  human  being.  All  the 
truths  of  the  Bible  are  but  the  envelope  of  this  remedy — in- 
scribed, indeed,  vrith  directions  for  its  use,  and  innumerable 
certificates  in  attestation  of  its  life-restoring  power.  That 
proposition  in  word  is,  "  God  is  love" — that  proposition  in  fact 
is,  "God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begot- 
ten Son" — (a  sin-offering) — "  that  whosoever  belie veth  in 

HIM    might    not    perish,    BUT    HAVE   EVERLASTING    LIFE."       "  The 

testimony  of  God,"  summed  up  by  the  last  of  the  Apostles,  is, 
*'  God  has  granted  to  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son." 
**  He,  then,  that  has  the  Son,  has  this  life ;  he  that  has  not  the 
Son  of  God,  haa  not  this  life."    But  all  this  is  again  concen- 

7 


74  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

trated  in  a  single  proposition  concerning  the  person,  office,  and 
mission  of  his  Son — viz.  "  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God." 
This  is  the  most  fundamental  proposition  in  the  moral  universe. 
It  is  the  foundation  of  the  system  of  redemption — the  foundation 
of  a  Christianas  hope  in  God — and  the  foundation  of  the  Chris- 
tian church.  Jesus  himself  so  commended  it,  Matt.  xvi.  16, 17. 
Paul  also  so  commends  it  to  our  consideration,  1  Cor.  iii.  11, 
saying,  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  which  is 
already  laid" — viz.  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ."^  So  God  himself 
commended  it  by  Isaiah,  xxviii.  16:  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God, 
Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion  for  a  foundation-stone,  a  tried  stone,  a 
precious  corner-stone,  a  sure  foundation :  he  that  believeth  shall 
not  make  haste" — "  shall  not  be  confounded  vrorld  without 
end."  So  also  the  Holy  Spirit  attested  it,  Acts  ii.  36.  "  Let 
all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly,  that  God  has  made  that 
Jesus  whom  you  crucified  both  Lord  and  Christ."  Thus  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  agree  in  one  testimony 
concerning  Jesus.  This  is  the  testimony  of  the  Law  in  all  its 
types — the  testimony  of  all  the  Prophets  in  their  predictions  of 
the  gospel  kingdom — and  it  is  the  testimony  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles. 

In  this  proposition,  therefore,  is  the  mysterious  and  sublime 
power  of  the  gospel.  It  is  the  distinctive  and  peculiar  object 
of  the  Christian's  faith.  There  is  no  salvation  in  the  belief  of 
the  call  of  Abraham,  the  mission  of  Moses,  or  the  preaching  of 
John  the  Harbinger,  any  more  than  in  the  translation  of  Enoch, 
the  salvation  of  Noah  from  the  flood,  or  of  Lot  from  the  over- 
throw of  Sodom.  There  is  no  development  of  the  Messiah  in 
any  of  these  facts  or  declarations.  Many  such  facts,  events,  and 
declarations  are  but  the  envelope  of  the  great  truth  of  all  divine 
revelation.  The  bread  which  sustains  life  is  not  in  the  ear  nor 
in  the  chaJBT,  but  in  the  corn.  Still  it  is  true,  that  were  there  no 
ear  and  no  chaff,  there  would  be  no  wheat.  We  give  them  their 
proper  importance ;  but  not  an  importance  beyond  their  mean- 
ing and  design.  The  power  of  the  sword  is  not  in  the  scabbard, 
nor  in  the  handle,  but  in  the  blade.  The  power  of  saving  faith 
is  in  the  saving  truth  believed.  Of  course,  no  truth  can  have 
power  over  either  the  heart  or  the  hope  of  man  that  is  not  un- 
derstood.    The  efficacy  is  in  the  sense,  and  not  in  the  sound. 

*  So  it  reads  in  the  Greek  of  the  received  text. 


ANTECEDENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  75 

The  sense  of  the  great  proposition  is,  therefore,  that  which  is 
believed,  and  not  the  mere  words  which  contain  that  sense. 
Indeed,  the  faith  that  saves  the  soul  communes  with  the  sense 
of  words,  and  not  with  the  words  themselves.  Millions  profess- 
ing Christianity  seem  to  think  that  there  is  a  peculiar  virtue  in 
the  mere  enunciation  of  "the  persons  of  the  Trinity" — a  sort 
of  magic  charm  or  cabalistic  power  in  so  many  words  or  letters 
peculiarly  arranged.  Bat  the  Great  Teacher  said,  "  It  is  eternal 
life  to  knoio  thee,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou 
hast  sent.""^  And  Isaiah  said,  "By  the  knowledge  of  him  shall 
my  righteous  servant  justify  many ;  for  he  shall  bear  their  ini- 
quities."! And  Jesus  said,  "He  that  received  the  seed  in  good 
ground  is  he  that  heareth  the  word  and  understandeth  itJ'X 
Again  he  says,  "If  you  continue  in  my  word,  you  shall  know  the 
truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free."^ 

Reprobates  are  sometimes  described  as  those  who  "hear,"  but 
who  do  not  understand  the  gospel.  And  they  do  not  understand 
it  because  they  will  not ;  for  ears  and  understanding  they  have, 
but  they  will  not,  they  do  not,  apply  them.  Still  the  truth  be- 
lieved, understandingly  believed,  is  that  which  instrumentally 
saves  the  soul.  Hence  preached  the  evangelical  Isaiah,  "  In- 
cline your  ear" — "  Hear,"  said  the  Lord,  "and  your  soul  shall 
live,  and  I  will  make  an  everlasting  covenant  with  you,  even  the 
sure  mercies  of  David." 

These  things  being  so,  according  to  the  constitution  of  the 
human  mind  and  of  the  universe,  the  great  proposition  must  be 
understood  before  it  can  be  believed  in  its  sanctifying  and  saving 
efficacy.  But  that  when  so  believed  it  possesses  the  power,  is 
clearly  and  strongly  affirmed  by  high  authority.  Thus  speaks 
the  Apostle  John: — "Whosoever  belieVeth  that  Jems  is  the 
Christ  is  born  of  God."  Again,  says  the  same  Apostle  : — "This 
is  the  victory  that  overcometh  the  world — viz :  our  faith.  Who 
is  he  that  overcometh  the  world  but  he  that  believeth  that 
Jestts  is  the  Son  of  God?"  "  Many  other  signs  truly  did  Jesus 
in  the  presence  of  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written  in 
this  book.  But  these  are  written  that  you  might  believe  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;  and  that,  believing,  you 
may  have  life  through  his  name."||  The  importance  and  sa- 
lutary power  of  this  faith  need  not,  methinks,  to  be  further 

•  John  xvii.  3.  f  Isa.  liii.  11.    J  Matt.  xiii.  23.   g  John  viu.  31.    U  John  xx.  30,  31. 


7^  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

argued.  The  justified,  and  sanctified,  and  saved  build  their 
hopes  upon  it— Jesus  builds  his  church  upon  it — God  himself 
founds  the  remedial  system  upon  it.  He  that  believes  it  is  be- 
gotten and  born  of  God — he  overcomes  the  world — and  will,  most 
certainly,  be  saved  and  obtain  through  it  eternal  life  ;  for  no 
man  can  believe  in  its  true  meaning,  and  not  confide  in  it. 

Demons,  indeed,  believe  and  tremble.  They  cannot  believe 
that  Jesus  died  for  them.  Therefore,  they  can  have  no  confi- 
dence in  him.  They  cannot  appropriate  one  of  his  promises. 
But  sinful  men  can  believe  that  to  them  is  the  word  of  this  sal- 
vation sent,  and  they  can  confide  in  the  Lord  Jesus.  Through 
their  faith  in  the  testimony  of  God,  and  their  personal  confidence 
in  the  promises  of  Christ,  they  can  individually  say,  "Christ 
loved  me,  and  gave  himself  for  me."  This  is  to  believe  God,  and 
to  believe  in  him  whom  he  has  sent.  This,  indeed,  is  the  efi'ect  of 
all  true  faith ;  for  no  one  can  be  said  to  believe  in  Jesus  that 
does  not  confide  in  him  for  his  own  personal  salvation. 

It  remains,  then,  that  we  develope  the  full  meaning  of  this 
vital  proposition  as  "the  foundation  of  repentance  from  dead 
works,"  and  as  the  basis  of  all  Christian  piety  and  humanity. 
In  doing  this  we  shall,  in  our  next  chapter,  attempt  to  develope 
that  "  REPENTANCE  UNTO  life"  which  God  has  granted  to  the 
nations  as  the  fruit  of  their  faith  in  the  divinely  authenticated 
proposition  that  "  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God." 


CHAPTER  V. 

REPENTANCE    UNTO    LIFE. 

"  He  is  exalted  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  to  grant  repentance  to  Israel  and  re- 
mission of  sins." — Acts  t.  31. 
'•  Then  hath  God  also  granted  to  the  Gentiles  repentance  unto  life."— Acts  xi.  18. 

In  the  Christian  Institution  faith  and  repentance  are  essen- 
tially and  inseparably  connected.  As  to  the  nature  of  that  con- 
nection there  has,  indeed,  been  some  debate  amongst  the  learned 
theorists;  but  as  to  the  fact  itself,  there  is  no  controversy 
amongst  intelligent  Christians  of  any  denomination. 

What  that  connection  is,  as  well  as  the  nature  and  importance 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  77 

of  evangelical  repentance,  will  best  appear  from  an  induction 
and  examination  of  the  more  prominent  portions  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures  which  treat  upon  that  subject.  The  book  of  God,  in 
all  matters  of  vital  importance,  is  its  own  best  interpreter. 
As,  then,  the  import  of  the  term  repentance  has  sometimes  been 
a  matter  of  doubt  with  some  sincere  inquirers,  we  shall  hastily 
glance  at  its  history,  as  found  in  the  apostolic  writings. 

The  English  verb  repent,  and  the  noun  repentance,  are,  together, 
found  no  less  than  sixty-four  times  in  the  common  New  Testa- 
ment. Of  the  forty  times  we  find  the  verb  repent  in  the  version 
commonly  read  by  authority,  we  have  two  very  different  words 
representing  it  in  the  Greek  original.  It  is  generally  more  or 
less  unfortunate  to  have  two  words  of  very  different  etymology 
uniformly  translated  by  one  and  the  same  term.  It  sometimes 
creates  considerable  ambiguity  as  to  the  sense  of  the  term  or  the 
passage  in  which  it  is  found.  There  is,  indeed,  in  this  case  a 
very  fortunate  circumstance,  which  throws  much  light  upon 
the  whole  subject  of  repentance.  It  is  this: — One  of  these 
terms,*  which,  etymologically  and  in  common  usage,  intimates 
mere  regret  or  concern  for  something  done,  without  respect  to  a 
change  of  the  affections  or  of  the  conduct  of  an  individual,  is 
never  found  in  connection  with  faith,  or  any  of  the  gospel  facts 
reported  in  the  Christian  records.  In  the  case  of  Judas  it  is 
found,  but  in  such  a  connection  of  things  as  clearly  intimates  its 
proper  sense.  In  that  case,  all  agree  that  it  indicated  neither 
change  of  heart  nor  change  of  life.  Nor  is  it  in  all  the  Chris- 
tian Scriptures  ever  found  in  the  imperative  mood.  God  never 
commanded  any  person  to  repent  in  the  style  of  Judas,  of  whom 
it  is  said,  he  repented  and  afterwards  hung  himself. 

Paul,  in  his  second  letter  to  the  Corinthians,  so  uses  this  term 
as  to  indicate  that  he  himself  repented  of  a  good  action — and 
that  there  was  a  repentance  to  be  repented  of,  and  "  a  repent- 
ance not  to  be  repented  of."  All  this  ambiguity  is  the  fault  of 
translators.  The  words  used  by  the  Apostle  are  different,  and 
in  all  reason  ought  to  have  been  translated  by  different  words. 
Then  all  would  have  understood  him  on  the  subject  of  evangeli- 
cal repentance  much  better.  Every  one  knows  that  a  person 
may  sometimes  regret,  or  be  sorry  for,  a  good  action  ;  especially 
when,  on  conferring  a  benefit  on  any  one,  that  benefit  is  abused 

*  Metamelomai. 
7* 


.18  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

to  the  injury  of  him  that  receives  it.  Paul,  indeed,  regretted 
that  he  had  written  a  very  good  letter  to^  the  Corinthians,  be- 
cause it  had  produced  excessive  grief  and  sorrow  among  them. 
But  seeing  that  it  had  resulted  in  a  "  repentance  to  salvation,'' 
he  ceased  to  regret  that  he  had  written  it.* 

God  himself  is  said  "to  repent'^  and  "not  to  repent;"  but  aa 
there  is  no  change  of  his  affections,  no  reformation  in  his  repent- 
ance, the  term  used  is  not  that  connected  with  the  gospel.  *'  I 
have  sworn,"  said  he,  "  and  will  not  repent."!  **  Thou  art  an 
eternal  priest."  Does  he  not  here  mean  that  he  will  never  re- 
gret nor  recall  this  appointment  ? 

While,  then,  we  are  sometimes  bewildered  by  having  these 
two  words,  so  radically  different  in  sense,  translated  by  one  and 
the  same  representative  on  every  occasion,  when  the  special 
import  of  one  of  them  is  understood,  we  may,  perhaps,  gain  a 
more  distinct  view  of  the  proper  import  of  the  other,  or  of  that 
repentance  which  is  to  life  and  to  salvation.  It  being  already 
shown  that  one  of  these  words  does  not  indicate  any  change  in 
the  affections,  any  transformation  of  character,  any  real  refor- 
mation of  life,  and  is,  therefore,  never  found  in  the  imperative 
mood  in  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  that  the  other  term  is  ex- 
clusively used  in  commanding  and  setting  forth  that  change  of 
heart  and  life  connected  with  salvation,  we  have  in  the  force 
and  meaning  of  the  word  selected  a  very  strong  intimation  of 
that  which  constitutes  that  repentance  to  life  which  is  now  the 
subject  of  our  present  inquiry.  It  is  not,  then,  without  good 
reason  that  we  conclude  from  the  history  of  this  term,  so  far  as 
already  traced,  that  neither  remorse  nor  regret  for  the  past, 
neither  sorrow  for  evils  done,  nor  purposes  of  amendment  of  life, 
j&ll  up  the  meaning  or  exhaust  the  force  of  the  word  selected  by 
the  Apostles. 

*  2  Cor.  vi.  10.  MeMnoian  eis  soteerian.  Metanoia,  and  not  metamd/)mai\  is  the  word 
connected  with  salvation.  How  much  better,  then,  to  hare  given  the  contrast  to  the 
English  reader  which  the  Apostle  gave  to  the  Greek  reader.  In  the  new  version 
the  whole  passage  reads  as  follows  :— "  I  now  rejoice,  not  that  you  were  made  sorry, 
but  that  your  sorrow  produced  reformation :  for  you  were  made  to  sorrow  in  a 
godly  manner,  that  you  might  be  injured  by  us  in  nothing.  For  godly  sorrow 
produces  a  reformation  to  salvation,  never  to  be  repented  of;  but  the  sorrow  of  the 
world  produces  death."  As  descriptive  of  godly  sorrow  he  adds :— "  Behold,  now, 
this  very  thing— your  being  made  sorry  with  a  godly  sorrow— what  carefulness  it 
wrought  in  you;  yes,  what  clearing  of  yourselves;  yes,  what  indignation;  yes, 
what  fear ;  yes,  what  carncist  desire ;  yes,  what  zeal ;  yes,  what  revenge." 

f  Metamelomai,  not  metanoeoo. 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  t9 

But  in  tracing  inductively  the  history  of  a  word  chosen  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  reveal  his  will  to  us,  which  occurs  not  less 
than  fifty-eight  times  in  the  New  Institution,  we  may,  certainly, 
arrive  at  a  very  clear  comprehension  of  its  meaning.  A  few 
specifications  shall  suffice  for  our  present  purpose. 

It  is  specially  worthy  of  notice  in  this  investigation  that  in 
the  first  and  last  communications  of  the  Messiah  we  find  an  im- 
perative repent.  His  harbinger,  also,  introduced  his  personal 
advent  with  the  command,  "  Repent,  for  the  reign  of  heaven 
approaches."  In  the  commencement  of  his  own  personal  min- 
istry, his  first  discourse  was,  "  Repent,  for  the  reign  of  heaven 
approaches."  His  twelve  Apostles,  under  their  first  commission, 
we  are  informed  by  Mark,  went  abroad  proclaiming  repentance 
to  the  people.  The  same  proclamation  was  made  by  the  seventy 
evangelists  sent  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  In- 
deed, the  ministry  of  John  is  characterized  as  the  proclamation 
of  "  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins."*  So 
that  during  the  personal  ministry  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  that 
of  his  harbinger,  repentance  was  the  burthen  of  every  discourse 
to  the  people. 

The  questions  propounded  to  the  preachers  by  the  more  con- 
scientious portions  of  their  hearers,  clearly  intimate  what  wa3 
their  understanding  of  the  precept  ^^  repent."  The  question, 
**  What  shall  we  do  f "  generally  propounded  by  those  who  first 
heard  them,  intimates  that  personal  reformation,  and  not  mere 
change  of  views  or  feelings,  was  implied  in  the  precept  itself. 
The  profession  of  repentance  without  reformation  or  fruits 
worthy  of  it,  they  were  clearly  informed,  would  avail  nothing. 
So  evident  it  is  that  their  contemporaries  understood  by  the 
precept  "  repent"  what  we  associate  with  the  word  "  reform." 

Nor  was  it  different  under  the  last  commission  given  to  the 
twelve  Apostles.  It  is  true,  the  word  repent  is  not  found  in  the 
version  of  it  by  Matthew  or  Mark,  but  when  expounded  by  the 
Apostles  themselves,  and  when  reported  by  Luke,  it  is  evident 
that  they  understood  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  be  the 
preaching  of  repentance,  with  new  arguments  and  motives. 
According  to  Luke,  the  Messiah,  immediately  before  his  ascen- 
sion, said  that  "repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be 
preached  in  his  name  amongst  all  nations,  beginning  at  Jerusa- 
lem."    So  that  with  great  propriety,  the  first  precept  given  by 

*  Mark  i.  4. 


80  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

Peter  in  his  opening  speech  on  the  memorable  Pentecost,  to  hia 
inquiring  audience,  was  "repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of 
you." 

Not  to  multiply  quotations,  it  may  suffice  to  add,  that  Paul 
not  only  represented  his  whole  ministry  of  the  word  as  "  the 
preaching  of  repentance  towards  God  and  of  faith  in  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,"  but  also  assured  the  Athenians  that,  under  the 
new  constitution  of  grace  as  ministered  by  Jesus,  "  God  com- 
mands all  men,  every  where,  to  repent."  Even  Christians,  when 
they  grow  cold  or  worldly  in  their  profession,  are,  in  the  last 
epistles  addressed  by  the  Saviour,  through  his  servant  John,  to 
the  churches  of  Asia,  commanded  to  repent  and  do  their  first 
works.  Truly,  then,  we  may  say  with  Peter,  that  "Jesus  is 
exalted  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  to  grant  repentance  to  Israel 
and  the  remission  of  sins." 

It  must,  we  think,  appear  obvious  to  all  upon  a  little  reflec- 
tion, that  the  proclamation  of  repentance  is  a  proclamation  of 
mercy — hence  the  connection  between  repentance  and  remission 
of  sins.  If  God  had  not  intended  to  forgive  all  men  on  repent- 
ance, to  what  purpose  could  he  have  commanded  all  men  to 
repent  ?  Kepentance  was  never  preached  to  fallen  angels  or 
apostate  spirits,  because  there  could  be  offered  to  them  no  motive 
to  repent.  Mercy,  then,  is  always  preached  when  repentance 
is  preached.  Hence  the  necessity  of  faith  as  "  the  foundation 
of  repentance  from  dead  works."  This  single  consideration — 
that  the  proclamation  of  repentance  is  a  proclamation  of  mercy, 
and  that  mercy  propounds  motives  in  the  gospel  to  induce  to 
repentance,  methinks  ought  to  satisfy  every  reflecting  mind  that 
the  connection  between  faith  and  repentance  is  that  of  cause  and 
effect,  or  of  means  and  end.  Unless  the  motives  are  accredited, 
the  arguments  of  mercy  are  impotent  and  unavailing.  Nay, 
indeed,  they  are  as  though  they  were  not.  So  true  is  it  that 
*'  he  that  cumeth  to  God"  must  not  only  "  believe  that  he  exists," 
but  also  "that  he  is  a  rewardcr  of  them  that  diligently  seek 
him."  But  how  could  any  one  believe  that  God  is  a  rewarder 
of  them  that  diligently  seek  him,  unless  God  has  so  promised  in 
the  gospel. 

Repentance,  indeed,  antecedent  to  faith,  to  me  appears  im- 
possible ;  for  liow  could  any  one  repent  of  sin  against  God,  if 
he  did  not  believe  that  he  had  sinned  against  God !  And  how 
oould  the  mercy  of  God  afford  any  encouragement  to  repentance 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  81 

unless  that  mercy  is  reported  to  us  and  believed !  So,  then, 
repentance  comes  by  faith,  as  faith  by  hearing,  as  hearing  by 
the  word  of  God.  As  no  one  could  hear  God  unless  God  had 
first  spoken,  and  as  no  one  could  believe  a  message  that  he  has 
never  heard,  so  no  one  could  repent  of  sin,  as  respects  God,  who 
has  not  first  believed  in  his  mercy. 

Notwithstanding  these  very  obvious  reflections,  and  almost 
primary  and  self-evident  truths,  there  are  a  few  learned  men 
who,  by  reason  of  the  fallacies  of  their  own  metaphysics,  argue 
that  repentance,  or  a  change  of  heart,  must  precede  faith ;  and 
thus  faith,  instead  of  purifying  the  heart,  is  itself  the  offspring 
of  a  pure  heart.  They  quote  a  saying  of  the  Messiah  reported 
by  Mark — "Repent  and  believe  the  gospel" — in  proof  of  their 
theory.  The  argument,  thence  deduced,  is,  that  in  the  colloca- 
tion of  these  words,  repentance  precedes  faith.  But  is  this  a 
sound  argument  ?  Is  the  order  of  words  in  a  sentence  the  ne- 
cessary order  of  things  or  of  effects  ?  Did  not  Peter  command 
those  who  believed  his  first  discourse,  on  asking  what  they 
should  do,  to  repent  and  to  be  baptized  ?  Their  propounding  this 
question  was  upon  the  admission  of  his  testimony ;  and,  there- 
fore, his  commanding  them  not  to  believe,  but  to  repent,  is  a 
clear  intimation  of  the  relation  between  faith  and  repentance. 
One  fact  is  enough  in  this  case : — the  persons  addressed  already 
believed  in  God,  and  are  now  commanded  to  repent  of  their  sins 
against  God,  and  to  believe  the  gospel.  "You  believe  in  God,'' 
said  the  Messiah,  "believe  also  in  me.''  Paul  did  preach  repent- 
ance to  the  Jew  and  to  the  Greek,  who  admitted  there  was  a 
God,  and  then  preached  also  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  a  corre- 
sponding repentance. 

The  same  theorists  who  place  repentance  before  faith,  annihi- 
late the  grace  of  God  which  appears  in  the  gracious  proclama- 
tion of  mercy  announced  by  Peter  to  the  council  of  the  Jewish 
nation,  assembled  to  intimidate  the  Apostles  in  the  work  of 
their  ministry.  Peter  affirmed  that  Jesus  was  exalted  to  the 
right  hand  of  God  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  to  grant  repent- 
ance to  Israel.  This  they  interpret  as  indicating  that  God 
works  repentance  in  the  hearts  of  the  elect.  "  Israel  represents 
the  chosen  race ;"  and  "granting  repentance"  is  with  them  "giv- 
ing it  into  their  hearts."  We  have  no  business  with  their  theory 
— to  prove  it  true  or  to  prove  it  false.  Our  business  is  to  show 
that  such  would  be  a  misconstruction  of  a  very  sublime  and 


W  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

gracious  declaration,  and  would  certainly  neutralize,  if  not 
stultify,  the  word  also  in  the  declaration  of  the  brotherhood  in 
Jerusalem,  made  to  Peter,  some  seven  years  after  this  time : — 
"  Then  hath  God  also  granted  to  the  Gentiles  repentance  unto 
life."  What  candid  mind  does  not  perceive  that,  if  Israel  re- 
presents the  elect  in  the  one  passage,  the  term  Gentiles  must 
represent  the  non-elect  in  this  passage;  and  if  the  words 
*'  granting  repentance'^  mean  specially  working  it  in  the  hearts 
of  the  elect,  in  the  one  passage,  in  the  other  it  must  mean  that 
he  works  it  in  the  heart  of  the  non-elect  ?  This  is  still  farther 
corroborated  by  the  word  also;  for  in  the  similarity  of  the 
words  "  granting  repentance  to  Israel,''  and  "  granting  repent- 
ance to  the  Gentiles,"  also,  superadded  to  the  latter,  must  refer 
to  the  former,  and  affirm  that  in  whatever  sense  he  granted  re- 
pentance to  Israel  he  has  granted  it  to  the  Gentiles. 

Having,  as  we  conceive,  now  rescued  this  passage  from  the 
theoretic  doctors,  we  shall  next  endeavour  to  appreciate  it  in  its 
apostolic  value  and  evangelical  importance.  It  is,  as  we  must 
think,  a  very  sublime  and  exhilarating  annunciation  of  a  very 
grand  scheme  of  mercy  and  deliverance  to  the  whole  world,  Jew 
and  Gentile,  consequent  upon  the  coronation  of  the  new  King  of 
the  Universe.  This  is  the  rudimental  conception  which,  in  the 
Apostle's  speech,  preceded  the  gracious  development.  As  if  he 
had  said — "You  the  sanhedrim,  in  council  assembled,  con- 
demned to  death  and  slew  the  Lord  Jesus,  hanging  him  upon 
a  tree.  But  God  condemned  your  sentence  by  raising  him 
from  the  dead,  and  exalting  him  to  his  own  right  hand  to  be  a 
Prince  and  a  Saviour  ;  not,  indeed,  exalting  him  to  pronounce 
upon  you  an  irreversible  doom  of  perdition  and  ruin  for  this 
your  unparalleled  crime,  but  for  the  purpose  of  tendering  re- 
pentance as  a  foundation  of  remission  of  sins  to  his  own  nation 
and  people — the  seed  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob — his  ancient 
friends."  To  "grant  repentance"  is,  then,  to  make  room  for  the 
advantage  of  a  change  of  views  concerning  him — a  change  of 
feeling  or  of  heart  to  him — and  a  change  of  conduct  towards 
him.  It  is  to  make  possible  a  plenary  remission  of  sins  to  all 
who  are  truly  sorry  for  their  sins,  and,  forsaking  them,  turn  to 
the  Lord.  "To  grant  repentance"  is,  then,  a  most  sublime  in- 
dication of  the  mercy  of  God  and  of  tlie  grace  of  our  Lord 
JesuH  Christ.  It  is  a  very  sententious  and  summary  annuncia- 
tion, that  a  system  of  grace  and  mercy  is  now  adopted  to  lead 


ANTECEDENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  83 

man  to  repentance,  that  he  "may  obtain  remission  of  sins,  and 
an  inheritance  amongst  them  that  are  sanctified/' 

This  magnificent  display  of  the  glory  of  Divine  grace  was  first 
tendered  to  the  Jews — to  those  persons  whose  hearts  were  full 
of  murder,  and  whose  hands  were  full  of  blood.  This  was 
superlatively  kind  and  divinely  great ;  for  certainly,  if  there 
was  yet  room  in  the  bosom  of  God  to  allow  repentance  to  Israel, 
no  other  nation  or  people  should  ever  after  despair.  To  confine 
the  first  publication  of  the  gospel  to  the  Jews,  and  to  press  it 
upon  the  acceptance  of  that  hardened,  disobedient,  and  wicked 
race,  was  laying  a  broad,  and  deep,  and  solid  basis  of  hope  in 
the  mercy  of  God  to  all  other  people  to  whom  it  might  after- 
wards be  tendered.  To  them  it  was  first  sent,  as  was  the  Mes- 
siah himself,  in  person.  But  now,  the  Lord  be  praised  and 
glorified  for  ever  1  it  is  most  cordially  and  most  importunately 
granted — tendered  to  all  nations  of  the  earth,  with  the  assurance 
that  Jesus  has  not  only  become  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of 
the  Jews,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world  ;  so  that  faith, 
repentance,  and  baptism  are,  by  the  commandment  of  the  ever- 
lasting God,  now  announced  to  all  the  world  for  the  remission 
of  sins.  Repentance,  then,  is  a  divinely  chartered  right,  vouch- 
safed to  every  nation  under  heaven,  through  the  mediation  of 
the  Lord  Messiah.  Hence  Paul,  the  ambassador  of  the  Messiah 
to  the  Gentiles,  assured  the  idolatrous  Athenians,  that  "God 
commandeth  all  men,  everywhere,  to  repent." 

The  universality  of  this  promulgation  of  repentance  still  fiir- 
ther  merits  our  special  attention.  Its  universality  proves  the 
universality  of  man's  sin,  the  universality  of  God's  grace,  and 
the  universality  of  human  misery  and  ruin  without  it.  If  God 
commanded  all  men,  everywhere,  to  repent,  it  certainly  inti- 
mates that  all  men,  everywhere,  need  repentance — that  all  men 
are  guilty  before  God.  This  is  not  merely  the  weakness  and 
frailty  of  human  nature,  so  often  complained  of  and  lamented ; 
it  is  not  the  mere  imputation  to  us  of  the  sin  of  our  common 
ancestor  and  representative  ;  but  it  is  our  voluntary  ignorance 
of  God — our  voluntary  ignorance  of  his  will — or  our  mere  indif- 
ference to  the  whole  subject  of  the  being,  character,  and  will  of 
God.  It  is,  in  other  cases,  our  rebellion  against  his  precepts, 
our  disregard  of  a  sense  of  duty,  of  the  dictates  of  conscience, 
the  known  and  often  repeated  violations  of  his  law.  A  mere 
want  of  that  perfection  which  he  necessarily  and  kindly  would 


84  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

require  of  us,  alone  renders  all  the  world  guilty  before  God. 
But  more  especially  the  present  and  most  fearful  condemnation 
that  now  presses  upon  that  world  to  which  we  now  belong,  is — 
**  that  light  has  come  into  the  world'^ — not  natural  light,  nor 
legal  light,  but  evangelical  light — the  light  of  life  eternal,  and 
men  choose  darkness — prefer  ignorance,  lust,  and  passion,  to 
the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  radiating  from 
the  face  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Hence  the  oft-repeated  and 
awful  oracle — "Unless  you  repent,  you  shall  all  perish."  God, 
then,  justly  commands  all  men,  everywhere,  to  repent. 

But  the  universality  of  the  precept  not  only  proves  that  all 
the  world  is  guilty  before  God,  but  that  "the  mercy  of  God  is 
unto  all  and  upon  all"  that  do  repent.  It  is  a  promulgation  of 
the  universality  of  God's  grace  and  mercy.  He  has  granted 
repentance  to  Jew  and  Gentile,  because  he  has  grace  and  mercy 
for  every  penitent  Jew  and  Gentile  on  the  face  of  the  earth. 
How  real,  then,  the  provisions  of  almighty  love  !  How  vast  the 
benevolence  of  God !  Truly  God  has  inexpressibly  loved  man- 
kind, when  "he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  him  might  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life.'' 
"  He  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world,  but 
that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved."  It  is,  as  the 
sequel  may  show,  a  conviction  of  this  that  leads  man  to  reforma- 
tion of  life,  that  reconciles  him  to  God,  and  subdues  his  heart 
to  the  obedience  of  faith. 

But  again :  the  universality  of  the  proclamation  of  repent- 
ance renders  it  universally  indispensable  to  forgiveness.  Faith, 
without  it,  is  dead  and  unavailing.  Works  of  any  sort,  without 
it,  are  unacceptable  to  God,  and  of  no  salutary  influence  upon 
him  that  performs  them.  Without  repentance  there  is,  there- 
fore, no  salvation  to  any  human  being ;  for  certainly,  if  the  uni- 
versality of  a  precept  demonstrates  the  universality  of  its  ol> 
jections ;  if  the  universality  of  grace  proves  that  all  men  may 
participate  of  it,  so  the  universality  of  the  precept  repent, 
argues  the  necessity  of  repentance  on  the  part  of  every  indivi- 
dual, in  order  to  his  personal  salvation  ;  and  hence  the  conclu- 
sion is  as  logically  as  awfully  true — no  repentance,  no  salvation. 

Still,  it  is  needful  to  press  still  farther  upon  the  attention  of 
the  reader  that  faith  is  as  ivxAy '' the  foundation  of  repentance 
from  dead  works,"  as  testimony  is  the  foundation  of  faith.  But 
faith  receives  its  character  and  power  from  the  character  of  the 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  85 

truth  believed.  Here  arises  the  difference  between  what  has 
improperly  been  contrasted  legal  and  evangelical  repentance — 
terms  which  define  nothing — which  are  as  useless  as  they  are 
unscriptural.  True,  indeed,  there  is  a  repentance  which  arises 
from  the  consideration  of  the  consequences  of  our  actions,  some- 
times called  legal,  set  forth  in  the  words  before  defined — a  con- 
cern and  terror  on  account  of  the  fruit  of  our  doings  ;  and  there 
is  also  a  change  of  mind  arising  from  the  consideration  of  the 
^principles  from  which  our  actions  proceed.  Neither  of  these 
ideas,  however,  nor  the  designation  of  worldly  and  godly  sorrow 
for  our  actions,  expresses  the  view  which  we  desire  to  commu- 
nicate. There  is  a  repentance  that  arises  from  a  discovery  of 
the  character  and  grace  of  God  developed  in  the  gospel,  in 
making  provision  for  the  pardon  of  sin,  which  characterizes 
that  change  of  mind  designated  repentance  unto  life  as  a  "re- 
pentance towards  God ;"  and  there  is  a  repentance  which  arises 
merely  from  the  dread  of  punishment,  without  any  hatred  of 
sin  or  love  of  holiness. 

An  enlightened  and  genuine  convert  to  the  gospel  repents  of 
every  antecedent  repentance;  for,  in  truth,  a  repentance  that 
merely  springs  from  the  shame  or  penalty  of  transgression,  is 
such  a  proof  of  moral  degradation  as  to  call  for  repentance  from 
every  one  that  knows  the  grace  of  God  in  truth.  Hence  the 
discriminating  Paunaught  the  Corinthians  that  there  was  a 
repentance  not  to  be  repented  of,  which  clearly  implies  that 
there  might  be,  as,  in  fact,  there  is,  a  repentance  that  needs  to 
"be  repented  of." 

Thus  are  we  led,  step  by  step,  up  to  the  apprehension  of  "re- 
pentance  unto  life."  Such  a  repentance  implies,  because  it 
requires,  an  antecedent  faith  in  some  proposition  having  life  in 
it ;  for  the  life  is  not  in  the  repentance,  but  in  that  to  which  it 
leads.  The  life  is  proposed  as  the  end,  while  repentance  is  but 
the  means  to  attain  it.  Yet  are  they  inseparably  connected ; 
for  this  life  is  not  without  repentance,  nor  this  repentance  with- 
out life.  Views  there  are,  in  the  faith,  and  motives  inspired  by 
it,  which,  when  perceived  and  possessed,  work  this  mysterious 
and  sublime  change.  It  is  light  that  makes  manifest  every 
thing.  Yet  light  is  very  different  from  the  things  manifested  by 
it.  It  is  the  truth  developed  in  the  great  proposition  that  God 
is,  by  Christ,  reconciling  a  world  to  himself,  not  imputing  to  men 
their  trespasses,  hut  beseeching  tliem  to  be  reconciled  to  him,  because 


86  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

Tie  lias  made  his  Son  a  sin-offering  for  us,  that  loe  might  he  made 
perfectly  righteous  through  him.  Now,  all  this  is  comprehended 
in  that  cardinal  proposition,  on  the  belief  of  which  the  Lord 
promised  to  build  his  church,  viz: — ^that  '^  Jesus  is  the  Messiah, 
the  Son  of  the  living  God."  It  is  this  sublime  proposition,  ap- 
prehended and  realized  by  faith,  that  works  repentance  unto 
life ;  that  subdues,  softens,  pacifies,  and  reconciles  the  heart  to 
God,  and  prepares  it  to  be  a  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

This  is  that  cardinal  element  in  the  gospel  which  contains  in 
it  the  principle  of  eternal  life.  Christ,  indeed,  is  our  life.  "Our 
life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God."  But  to  us  Christ  is  first  pre- 
sented in  the  testimony  concerning  him  ;  then  he  is  in  the  faith 
of  him  that  believes  that  testimony  ;  then  in  his  heart  he  be- 
comes "the  hope  of  glory  ;"  and,  finally,  in  his  life  of  righteous- 
ness and  holiness,  he  is  manifested  to  the  world.  This,  indeed, 
constitutes  *'  a  reformation  not  to  be  repented  of." 

Now,  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  is  the  only  divinely-appointed 
means  for  producing  this  sublimely  moral  and  spiritual  renova- 
tion of  heart.  Christ  must  be  revealed  to  us  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
in  all  the  fulness  of  his  grace,  and  all  the  attractions  of  his  love. 
He  must  be  made  to  stand  out  before  us  as  "  the  brightness  of 
his  Father's  glory" — as  the  "express  image"  of  his  glorious 
and  lovely  character.  His  obedience  unto  death,  his  voluntary 
sacrifice  of  himself  for  our  sins,  the  unspeakable  value  of  his 
blood,  as  the  only  means  of  expiation  and  personal  purification, 
must  be  fully  set  before  the  mind,  as  well  as  the  necessity  of 
his  death,  to  honour  and  justify  God  in  justifying  a  sinful  man. 

If,  indeed,  repentance  unto  life  be  a  change  of  our  views,  of 
our  afiections,  and  of  our  conduct,  as  it  most  certainly  is,  then 
that  person,  in  relation  to  whom  our  views,  affections,  and  con- 
duct are  to  be  changed,  must  be  developed  to  our  apprehension 
in  such  an  attitude  and  character  as  to  be  the  proper  means  of 
accomplishing  such  a  change. 

The  revelation  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  is  not  made  to 
us  through  the  works  of  nature  or  the  schemes  of  providence 
and  moral  government.  This  revelation  is  exclusively  confined 
to  the  work  of  redemption.  Hence  the  necessity  of  correct 
views  and  a  just  appreciation  of  the  nature  of  the  death  of 
Christ  as  an  atoning  sacrifice.  That  is  the  radiating  centre  of 
the  whole  remedial  system.  It  is  in  that  we  discover  all  the 
divine  excellencies.     It  is  there,  and  only  there,  that  inflexible 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  87 

justice,  Immaculate  purity,  inviolate  truth,  and  Infinite  mercy, 
appear  in  perfect  harmony  with  each  other,  combining  all  their 
effulgence  and  glory  in  opening  for  us  a  way  into  the  holiest  of 
all.  Beholding  there,  as  In  a  reflecting  mirror,  the  purity  of 
God  and  our  own  deformity;  the  majesty  of  his  government 
and  the  dignity  of  his  law ;  the  malignity  and  hatefulness  of 
sin,  in  contrast  with  the  beauty  and  loveliness  of  holiness,  right- 
eousness, and  truth,  we  are  changed  into  the  same  image  from 
glory  to  glory,  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord.  Thus  contemplating 
him  whom  our  sins  have  pierced,  we  begin  to  mourn  over  them, 
and  to  abhor  them ;  we  prostrate  ourselves  before  his  throne  of 
mercy,  and,  with  the  humble  and  penitent  publican,  we  say : 
**  God  be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner.''  Such  is  that  repentance 
unto  life  which  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  has  granted  to  the 
Jew  and  to  the  Greek. 

In  the  Geneva  version  of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  in 
some  other  ancient  English  versions,  "amend  your  life"  and 
**  amendment  of  life"  are  used  for  repent  and  repentance.  Re- 
form and  reformation,  in  the  judgment  of  some  of  our  best 
critics,  are  to  be  preferred  to  repent  or  amend  your  lives.  But 
all  sound  interpreters  agree  in  this,  that,  while  a  change  of  mind, 
including  a  change  of  views  and  a  change  of  feelings,  is,  by  the 
etymology  and  use  of  the  original  term,  clearly  indicated,  and 
essential  to  the  requisitions  of  the  gospel ;  still  the  consumma- 
tion and  evidence  of  "repentance  unto  life,"  or  of  "repentance 
towards  God,"  is  a  new  and  holy  life.  To  which,  indeed,  a 
change  of  views  and  a  change  of  the  heart  are  indispensable. 
Therefore  it  is  that  the  phrases  "repentance  unto  life,"  "recon- 
ciliation to  God,"  "reformation,"  are  representatives  of  the 
Bame  great  radical  change  contemplated  under  different  forma 
and  figures  of  speech. 

True  repentance  never  fails  to  manifest  itself  in  all  cases  of 
injury  to  the  person,  character,  or  property  of  our  neighbour, 
by  an  immediate  redress,  as  far  as  possible,  of  any  injury  we 
may  have  done  hLm.  The  Jewish  law  of  offerings  for  trespass 
on  the  rights  of  others,  made  a  restitution  and  satisfaction  to 
the  injured  in  all  cases  in  which  it  was  possible,  essential  to  for- 
giveness. No  acknowledgment  to  the  Lord — no  offering  to  the 
priest,  could  obtain  remission,  unless  the  injury  done  was  re- 
dressed to  the  full  amount  possible.  Zaccheus  repented  of  all 
his  wrongs  done  to  his  neighbours  in  this  way,  and  was  honoured 


88  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

by  the  Messiah  in  a  very  public  and  impressive  manner.  It 
has  reason  and  law,  and  the  approbation  of  the  Messiah,  to  en- 
force it. 

Christians,  when  delinquent  in  any  duty,  when  backsliding  or 
simply  growing  cold,  are  also  commanded  to  repent — to  do  their 
jirst  works.  Every  allusion  to  repentance  unto  life  indicates 
that  it  is  no  mere  change  of  a  creed,  a  theory,  or  a  profession. 
It  is  a  real,  positive  change  of  heart  and  of  life.  "Old  things 
are  passed  away,  all  things  are  become  new."  "Fruits  meet  for 
repentance"  are  always  expected  to  be  consequent  upon  the 
profession  of  it.  Without  these,  the  pretension  is  idle  and  de- 
ceptious.  These  fruits  are  truth,  piety,  justice,  humanity ;  the 
crucifixion  of  the  flesh,  with  all  its  affections  and  lusts.  "  The 
grace  of  God  which  brings  salvation  teaches  us  that,  denying 
ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should  live  soberly,  right- 
eously, and  godly,  in  this  present  evil  world."  Such  is  evan- 
gelical repentance,  in  deed  and  in  truth. 

Its  connection  with  faith  as  its  fruit,  as  its  constant  concomitant, 
is,  we  hope,  from  the  evidences  adduced,  and  the  accompanying 
reflections,  sufficiently  apparent.  Its  whole  importance  in  the 
Christian  system  cannot  be  contemplated  apart  from  other  pre- 
cepts and  duties  very  intimately  associated  with  it.  We  have 
but  in  part  traced  its  connection  with  faith,  with  the  word  of 
truth,  with  the  Spirit  of  God,  with  the  sacrifice  of  the  Messiah. 
It  is  intimately  associated  with  Christian  baptism.  So  intimate 
is  this  connection,  that  both  by  John  the  Baptist  and  Peter,  and 
the  other  Apostles,  it  is  made  to  precede  it  as  essential  to  its 
practical  benefit  to  the  subject  of  that  holy  ordinance.  It  will 
again  fall  in  our  path  to  hear  and  contemplate  the  connection 
between  faith,  repentance,  baptism,  and  the  remission  of  sins. 
Meantime,  it  must  suffice  to  say,  that  all  the  links  of  that  golden 
chain  of  grace  which  connects  and  binds  our  souls  to  the  throne 
of  God,  are  most  intimately  connected  with  one  another ;  and 
the  institutions  and  ordinances  that  call  for  them  as  prerequi- 
sites, are  most  happily  devised,  not  only  to  display  that  connec- 
tion, but  also  to  make  each  one  of  them  contribute,  in  the  proper 
time  and  place,  that  amount  of  blessing  to  us  which  our  condi- 
tion and  circumstances  in  life  so  necessarily  require. 

The  duty  of  repentance  is,  indeed,  always  obligatory  on  every 
one  that  commits  any  act  of  impiety  or  immorality.  Without 
repentance,  pardon  of  sin  is  impossible.    God  cannot  forgive 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  8» 

the  impenitent.  It  would  be  doing  the  offender  a  great  wrong, 
and  God  a  great  dishonour.  There  is  a  state  of  mind  suitable 
to  the  reception  of  the  grace  of  forgiveness.  In  the  absence 
of  that  state,  it  could  not  be  enjoyed.  Hence,  motives  to  lead 
man  to  this  state  are  indispensable ;  and  according  to  the  mo- 
tives, so  is  that  state  of  mind  to  which  the  Lord  has  always  been 
pleased  to  vouchsafe  this  gift.  He  is  not  willing  that  any  should 
perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance — thereby  indi- 
cating that  then,  and  not  till  then,  can  any  one  be  saved. 


CHAPTER  yi. 

COVENANTS  OT   PROMISE CIRCUMCISION. 

**  And  he  gave  him  the  covenant  of  circumcision ;  and  Abraham  begat  Isaac,  and 
circumcised  him  the  eighth  day." — Stephen.    Acts  vii.  8. 

The  Creator  of  the  universe,  the  Father  of  angels  and  of  men, 
has  always  operated  according  to  a  previous  purpose,  and  go- 
verned according  to  an  antecedent  law.  Creation,  providence, 
and  redemption  are,  indeed,  but  the  execution  and  development 
of  eternal  counsels.  The  universe  is  one  grand  system,  the  result 
of  a  well-matured  plan,  the  consummation  of  a  previously-existing 
scheme.  It  is  not  an  accident,  a  contingency,  a  fortuitous  con- 
course of  atoms ;  but  a  sublime  system  of  adaptations  tending 
to  a  complete  and  perfect  development  of  its  author,  according 
to  the  intellectual  and  moral  capacities  of  his  rational  offspring. 
With  our  greatest  apostle  we  say — **  Of  him,  and  through  him, 
and  to  him  are  all  things :  to  whom  be  glory  for  ever  and  ever. 
Amen  V 

So  much  of  the  universe,  its  author,  and  plan,  as  man  can 
understand  and  enjoy,  as  he  is  now  constituted,  God  has  kindly 
opened  to  his  contemplation  and  apprehension.  All  beyond 
this  is  designed  for  future  development,  or  for  other  ranks  of 
intelligence  above  us.  Meantime,  a  volume  has  been  kindly 
presented  to  man,  containing  an  account  of  himself,  his  origin, 
present  condition,  and  future  destiny.  It  is  such  a  revelation 
of  God  and  of  man,  such  a  record  of  the  past,  and  such  an  anti- 

8* 


90  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

cipation  of  the  future,  as  meets  all  the  intellectual  wants  and 
moral  exigencies  of  the  human  race. 

This  divinely-inspired  volume  proceeds  upon  the  plan  of  a 
gradual  and  progressive  development,  adapting  itself  to  all  the 
conditions  of  human  existence.  The  human  family  having  an 
infancy,  a  childhood,  a  manhood,  and  an  old  age,  the  Book  of 
God  not  only  recognises  these  conditions  of  our  existence,  but 
admirably  adapts  itself  to  them  all.  We  have  the  bud  and  the 
blossom,  the  green  and  the  ripe  fruit  of  humanity,  as  we  have 
them  in  other  departments  of  nature.  So  have  we  a  character- 
istic unity  of  plan,  a  characteristic  progression  and  development 
in  all  the  works  and  ways  of  God  to  man.  It  is  the  same  great 
mind,  the  same  supreme  intelligence,  the  same  active  benevo- 
lence, working  everywhere  and  at  all  times  in  the  communica- 
tion of  himself  to  his  intelligent  and  moral  offspring. 

God  appears  first  as  a  Creator ;  next  as  a  Preserver ;  then  as 
Governor  of  his  own  universe.  In  all  these  attitudes,  as  in  the 
special  case  of  man's  redemption,  he  not  only  uniformly  acts 
according  to  a  previous  plan,  but  in  all  his  plans  and  operations 
there  is  a  peculiar  unity  or  similarity  of  action.  In  creation  he 
operated  through  authoritative  precepts.  "He  spake,  and  it 
was  done ;''  he  commanded,  and,  from  nothing  previously  exist- 
ing, the  hosts  of  the  universe  arose  at  his  bidding ;  his  simple 
volition,  assuming  the  form  of  an  oral  precept,  gave  birth  to  the 
universe  and  all  that  inhabit  it.  The  six  days'  operations  make 
but  one  imperative  sentence,  solemnly  pronounced.  The  word 
of  God  is,  therefore,  the  Constitution  of  the  Universe. 

As  the  human  body  to  the  soul,  so  is  the  word  of  God  to  his 
volition.  Ilis  word  is  but  the  vehicle  through  which  his  crea- 
tive power  manifests  itself.  It  is  the  mere  form  or  embodi- 
ment of  his  volition — the  annunciation  of  his  purpose.  God 
always  works  by  means,  never  without  them.  The  means, 
indeed,  are  but  the  envelope  of  his  will.  The  connection  be- 
tween the  means  and  the  end  is  not  always  apparent,  and  pro- 
bably never  fully  understood. 

Can  any  one  show  the  necessary  connection  between  com- 
manding light  to  spring  out  of  darkness,  and  the  shining  forth 
of  light  ?  Yet,  at  the  bidding  of  God,  darkness  brought  forth 
light !  We  still  enlighten  the  world  by  making  the  darkest  and 
blackest  of  all  things  the  parent  of  light,  and  the  medium  of 
general  information.     What  is  more  opaque  than  a  mctalliijj 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  91 

type  ?  What  is  blacker  than  ink  ?  Yet  these  are  the  suns  and 
the  stars  of  the  intellectual  and  moral  world.  It  is  not  the 
carte  hlanche,  the  pure  white  paper,  but  the  dark  letters  upon  it, 
that  enlighten  the  world.  Probably  the  means  and  the  end 
were  never  more  alike,  nor  more  philosophically  connected, 
than  in  the  case  of  bringing  light  out  of  darkness  by  a  metallic 
type  covered  with  ink. 

The  universe,  resting  upon  the  word  of  God,  the  embodiment 
of  his  will,  has,  therefore,  a  fixed  and  immutable  constitution. 
Nature  (a  term  not  generally  well  understood)  is  but  the  con- 
stitutional operation  of  a  conservative  law.  Man,  in  his  physi- 
cal constitution,  is  wholly  at  the  disposal  and  under  the  control 
of  the  common  law  that  presides  over  the  destinies  of  all  other 
terrestrial  bodies. 

But  he  has  a  mind  as  well  as  a  body.  He  has  a  moral  as 
well  as  a  physical  constitution.  His  happiness  is  not  earthly 
and  sensual,  but  designed  to  be  both  spiritual  and  heavenly. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  a  paoral  constitution  for  moral  agents 
capable  of  enjoying  a  spiritual  system.  Man  must,  indeed,  be 
governed  by  some  supreme  divinity.  He  must  have  a  consti- 
tuted and  absolute  sovereign  Lord  and  Master.  And  there 
must  be  some  supreme  constitution,  or  law,  or  covenant,  by 
which  his  Sovereign  and  himself  can  understand  each  other  and 
maintain  perpetual  amity.  He  may  honour  the  God  that  made 
him,  or  make  a  god  for  himself.  A  god  he  must  have.  And 
he  may  accept  of  a  constitution  or  covenant  from  God,  or  make 
one  with  Satan  and  ruin.     A  covenant  he  must  have. 

Thus  advance  we  through  the  portico  of  experience  to  the 
threshold  of  the  temple  of  revelation.  Standing  here  on  con- 
secrated ground,  we  feel  the  need  of  just  such  a  system — 
such  constitutional  provisions  as  are  indicated  in  the  ^'cove- 
nants of  promise^"  with  which  the  volumes  of  divine  revela- 
tion abound,  and  by  which  these  volumes  are  divided  into  several 
parts. 

The  Bible  covenants  are  connected  with  the  names  of  Adam, 
Noah,  Abraham,  Moses,  Aaron,  David,  Jesus  the  Messiah. 
These  are  aU,  more  or  less,  public  transactions.  We  shall, 
therefore,  severally  examine  them,  and  deduce  from  the  analysis 
some  practical  and  useful  conclusions. 

But  first  it  may  be  asked,  What  do  we  understand  by  a  cove- 
nant f    An  analysis  of  the  covenants  themselves  will  best  indi- 


92  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

cate  this.  But  in  anticipation  of  the  result  of  such  an  examina- 
tion, we  shall  now  define  the  term. 

Amongst  men  we  have  covenants.  In  these  there  are  parties. 
One  may  sometimes  be  the  covenanter — the  other  the  covenan- 
tee. The  former  propounds — the  latter  accepts  the  stipulation. 
These  terms  are,  however,  seldom  used.  Both  parties  are  most 
generally  both  covenanters  and  covenantees.  They  both  stipu- 
late and  re-stipulate.  Such  covenants  are  agreements  or  bonds 
entered  into  between  two  or  more  parties  on  certain  terms. 
Such  the  Greeks  called  a  mintheekee — the  Latins  a  foedus — ^we  a 
covenant,  because  that  word  literally  indicates  a  coming  together 
— an  agreement.  With  us,  indeed,  a  constitution,  or  a  form  of 
government,  because  an  agreement  on  certain  principles  between 
the  government  and  the  citizens,  is,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  a 
covenant. 

The  Hebrew  term  heritJi,  derived  from  harar,  to  purify,  indi- 
cating a  purification,  usually  by  sacrifice,  is  that  used  to  repre- 
sent these  transactions  in  the  book,  of  Genesis  and  throughout 
the  Jewish  Scriptures.  This  word  is  represented  in  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  or  Greek  version,  by  the  term  diatheekee,  and  never  by 
suntJieekee.  In  a  suntheekee,  or  covenant  between  man  and  man, 
the  parties  are  or  may  be  equal.  They  are  always  human 
beings.  But  in  a  diatheekee  one  of  the  parties  may  be  so  far 
above  the  other  in  rank  and  nature,  as  to  propound  all  the 
items  of  the  institution  or  covenant  to  the  other  party ;  to  which 
that  party  must  accede  in  order  to  the  participation  of  the  bless- 
ings or  benefits  proposed  in  the  institution.  Hence,  precepts 
as  well  as  promises  are  called  covenants  when  they  emanate 
from  God,  and  have  any  benefits  annexed  to  them.  When  any 
service  is  exacted,  or  any  duty  commanded,  by  an  ofi*ended  party, 
and  made  the  condition  of  friendship  or  agreement  Avith  the 
offending  party,  it  may  be  called  a  diatheekee  in  the  Jewish  ac- 
ceptation. Divine  covenants  having  always  been  founded  upon 
sacrifice  is,  indeed,  the  best  reason  for  their  having  been  called 
herith.  It  is  very  obvious  that  without  sacrifice  to  purify  the 
party  taken  into  covenant  with  God,  no  transaction  of  this  sort 
was  ever  valid,  or  regarded  as  ratified.  This  may,  indeed,  be 
the  reason  why  the  first  covenant  or  charter  given  to  man  is  not 
called  anywhere  in  the  Scripture  a  covenant,  though  possessing 
all  the  constituents  of  a  covenant,  sacrifice  only  excepted.  But 
as  theologians  of  all  schools  have  called  this  transaction  a  cove- 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  93 

nant,  wanting  sacrifice,  we  shall  in  our  list  of  covenants  give  to 
it  its  usual  title,  and  proceed  to  adduce  these  public  transactions 
as  they  occur  in  the  Jewish  writings. 

When  God  instituted  human  society  by  the  creation  of  the 
original  pair,  he  immediately  granted  to  them  a  charter  or  insti- 
tution indicative  of  their  relations  to  him,  and  declarative  of 
the  conditions  of  their  future  happiness.  This  has  sometimes 
been  theologically  called  a  covenant  of  works,  in  contrast  with 
a  covenant  of  grace.  But  there  were  no  works  prescribed  in 
this  institution.  It  was  a  charter,  a  stipulation,  and  a  guaran- 
tee of  liberty  and  life  to  man.  It  removed  all  suspense  and  un- 
certainty as  to  the  extent  of  his  liberty  or  the  continuance  of 
his  felicity.  It  was  liberty  and  life  secured  by  an  immutable 
charter  on  no  other  condition  than  to  observe  a  prescribed  limit. 
Its  seal  was  the  tree  of  life,  by  the  fruit  of  which  our  progeni- 
tors might  have  lived  for  ever,  did  they  but  keep  within  the 
precincts  of  that  liberty  and  bliss  kindly  secured  to  them  by 
this  Divine  institution.  Such  was  the  original  charter  vouch- 
safed to  man. 

The  second  covenant  or  institution  of  favour  bestowed  upon 
our  race  was  that  conferred  on  the  father  and  founder  of  the 
postdiluvian  world.  After  the  deluge  God  kindly  gave  to  Noah 
an  assurance  that  he  would  never  repeat  that  calamity  again. 
It  was  a  charter  concerning  "  day  and  nighty  seed-time  and  har- 
vest, summer  and  winter,"  in  all  coming  time.  Jer.  xxxiii.  20- 
25.     Gen.  ix.  1-9.     Its  seal  or  pledge  is  the  rainbow. 

The  third  institution  was  that  tendered  to  Abraham  in  the 
seventy-fifth  year  of  his  life,  and  of  the  world  2083,  guarantying 
to  him  a  son,  a  great  public  benefactor,  in  whom  all  the  families 
of  the  earth  should  be  blessed.  These  three  institutions  were 
of  a  very  public  character,  being  tendered  to  the  human  race. 
The  whole  world  is  interested  in  each  of  them.  Life  and  liberty 
were  covenanted  in  the  first ;  day  and  night,  seed-time  and  har- 
vest in  the  second ;  a  redeemer  and  benefactor  is  promised  in 
the  third. 

But  to  secure  and  develop  all  the  blessings  of  the  third, 
other  institutions  were  annexed.  One  concerning  an  inherit- 
ance for  the  family  from  which  the  world's  benefactor  was  to 
arise ;  the  other  concerning  a  special  providence  which  in  all 
temporal  favours  would  distinguish  the  family  of  this  most  il- 
lustrious philanthropist.    That  concerning  the  inheritance  is 


94  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

recorded  In  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Genesis,  and  that  concerning 
the  special  providence  in  the  seventeenth.  The  former  occurred 
immediately  before  the  birth  of  Ishmael,  in  the  eighty-sixth  of 
Abraham,  and  the  latter  about  the  same  time  before  the  birth 
of  Isaac,  in  the  ninety-ninth  of  Abraham. 

The  covenant  guarantying  the  inheritance  was  confirmed  over 
sacrifice ;  that  concerning  the  family,  by  circumcision.  The  land 
■was  to  be  bought  at  the  price  of  the  blood  of  its  inhabitants, — 
the  family  blessings  by  insulating  the  people  of  Abraham  from 
all  other  families  by  the  circumcision  of  the  males  of  his  house- 
hold while  yet  infants,  without  their  knowledge  or  consent. 
This  is  the  transaction  which  Stephen  denominated  the  "  cove- 
nant of  circumcision."  The  covenant  first  stipulated  with 
Abraham  on  his  departure  from  Ur  of  Chaldea  is  by  Paul  called 
"the  covenant  concerning  Christ  J'  That  concerning  Christ 
was  in  the  seventy-fifth,  while  that  concerning  the  flesh  or  cir- 
cumcision was  in  the  ninety-ninth  of  Abraham.  These  trans- 
actions, though  not  so  extensive  and  public  as  the  three  former 
institutions,  are  nevertheless  both  public  and  national.  The 
whole  world  is  interested  in  the  first  three ;  the  whole  family 
of  Abraham  through  Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  last  two. 

True,  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews  derive  advantages, 
though  not  the  same  advantages,  from  these  institutions.  By 
locating  the  family  of  Abraham  in  a  well-defined  country,  whose 
boundaries  are  given,  and  by  putting  upon  every  male  child  an 
indelible  mark  in  the  flesh  declarative  of  the  covenant  with 
Abraham,  the  Gentiles  are  assisted  in  deciding  the  pretensions 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  to  be  the  covenanted  Saviour  of  the  world. 

But  as  there  were  two  great  promises  in  these  institutions 
vouchsafed  to  Abraham,  one  concerning  his  natural,  the  other 
concerning  his  supernatural  ofispring — and  as  the  whole  human 
race  was  interested  in  the  one  or  the  other,  or  in  both,  each  one 
of  these  promises  was  at  a  proper  period  developed  in  a  great 
national  institution — one  represented  by  Sarah  and  the  other  by 
Hagar,  the  typical  mothers  of  Abraham's  oflfspring.  Two  king- 
doms, one  of  this  world,  and  one  "  not  of  this  world"  were  built 
upon  these  two  institutions.  That  of  this  world  Paul  allegorically 
Bets  forth  in  the  character  and  relation  of  Ilagar  and  her  son 
Ishmael ;  the  other,  "  not  of  this  world,"  he  sets  forth  in  the 
Bame  style  in  tlie  relation  and  character  of  Sarah  and  her  son 
Isaac.    One  of  these  was  dispensed  to  all  Israel  by  the  mediator 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  95 

Moses — ^tHe  other  to  all  the  believing  sons  of  Abraham  in  all 
nations  by  the  mediator  Jesus.  One  of  these  institutions,  from 
Mount  Sinai,  is  now  called  the  Old  Covenant,  generating  to 
bondage ;  the  other  is  called  the  New  Covenant,  from  Jerusalem 
above,  of  the  character  of  the  free  woman,  the  mother  of  all  the 
free-born  sons  of  God. 

Besides  these  public  institutions,  we  shall  allude  to  two 
others — one  concerning  the  priesthood  of  Aaron,  the  other  con- 
cerning the  throne  of  David;  one  concerning  the  mitre,  the 
other  concerning  the  sceptre  of  Israel.  The  priesthood  was 
covenanted  to  Aaron,  the  sceptre  to  David.  Each  of  these  is 
designated  as  a  covenant.  "  Thou  shalt  anoint  the  sons  of 
Aaron  as  thou  didst  anoint  their  father,  that  they  may  minis- 
ter to  me  in  the  priest's  office :  for  their  anointing  shall  surely 
be  an  everlasting  priestJiood  throughout  their  generations."  Ex. 
xl.  13-15.  Again,  "  Behold  I  give  unto  the  son  of  Eleazer,  the 
son  of  Aaron,  mj/  covenant  of  peace :  and  he  shall  have  it,  and 
his  seed  after  him,  even  the  covenant  of  an  everlasting  priest- 
hood."    Num.  XXV.  12, 13. 

Concerning  the  kingdom  he  saith — "  The  Lord  hath  rent  the 
kingdom  of  Israel  from  thee  this  day,  and  hath  given  it  to  a 
neighbour  of  thine,  better  than  thou.  The  Strength  of  Israel 
will  not  lie,  nor  repent :  for  he  is  not  a  man  that  he  should  re- 
pent." 1  Sam.  XV.  28.  "  The  Lord  hath  sworn  to  David  to 
translate  the  kingdom  from  the  house  of  Saul,  and  to  set  up  the 
throne  of  David  over  Israel  and  over  Judah,  from  Dan  even  to 
Beersheba."  2 Sam.  iii.  9,  10.  "I  have  made  a  covenant  with 
my  chosen  ;  I  have  sworn  unto  David  my  servant.  Thy  seed  will 
I  establish  for  ever,  and  huild  up  thy  throne  to  all  generations." 
Ps.  Ixxxix.  3.  "  Once  have  I  sworn  by  my  holiness,  that  I  will 
not  lie  unto  David:  his  seed  shall  endure  for  ever,  and  hi8 
throne  as  the  sun  before  me."    Ps.  Ixxxix.  35,  36. 

From  all  these  transactions  of  divine  authority,  these  gifts  and 
promises  of  God,  considered  in  the  aggregate,  and  each  one 
minutely  analyzed,  we  come  to  the  following  conclusions : — 

1.  Of  these  nine  covenants,  God  was  always  one  party.  They 
were  all  divine  institutions. 

2.  Seven  of  them  were  made  with  individual  men.  These 
men  were  Adam,  Noah,  Abraham,  renewed  to  Isaac,  and  again 
to  Jacob,  Aaron,  and  David ;  but  they  were  all  public  men,  heads 
and  rep'eseiitaiives  of  families  and  nations. 


9^  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

'  3.  Each  of  them  had  a  blessing  peculiar  to  itself.  They  were 
all  gracious.  The  first  guarantied  life  and  liberty  ;  the  second, 
day  and  night,  seed-time  and  harvest,  without  a  second  and  uni- 
versal deluge ;  the  third,  the  blessing  of  all  nations,  spiritually 
and  eternally,  in  a  son  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  ;  the 
fourth  secured  an  inheritance  ;  the  fifth  promised  a  special  pro- 
vidence ;  the  sixth  conferred  the  office  of  the  priesthood — 
atonement,  intercession,  and  benediction,  in  the  name  of  Jeho- 
vah, to  Aaron  and  his  first-born  sons ;  the  seventh  gave  the 
sceptre  and  throne  of  Israel  to  David  and  his  sons  for  ever. 

4.  Two  of  them  became  the  constitutions  of  kingdoms.  The 
Jewish  state  was  founded  upon  that  mediated  by  Moses  at 
Mount  Sinai.  The  Christian  church  is  founded  upon  that  pro- 
mised in  Jeremiah  xxxi.  31-34,  developed  in  the  Apostolic 
Records — especially  Hebrews,  8th  chapter. 

5.  Each  of  them  had  an  appropriate  seal,  pledge,  or  token 
connected  with  it.  They  were  solemnly  closed  and  confirmed 
bonds,  or  charters.  There  is  a  singular  appositeness  and  con- 
geniality between  the  seals  and  pledges  of  these  institutions  and 
their  provisions.  For  example,  the  Covenant  of  Life  and  Lib- 
erty, or  the  Adamic  Institution,  had  the  Tree  of  Life  for  its 
pledge  and  security.  The  Covenant  against  a  Deluge,  guaran- 
tying day  and  night,  seed-time  and  harvest,  has  the  Rainbow  in 
the  bosom  of  a  dark  and  portentous  cloud  ;  that  concerning  the 
Messiah  had  a  simple  oath ;  that  concerning  an  inheritance 
bought  with  blood  was  sealed  by  the  usual  signs  of  ancient 
treaties — the  parties  passing  between  the  divided  bodies  of  vic- 
tims ;  that  concerning  temporal  blessings  connected  with  the 
fleshly  ofi'spring  of  Abraham,  was  confirmed  by  circumcision ; 
that  at  Mount  Sinai,  ministered  by  Moses,  was  sealed  with  ani- 
mal blood  and  sacrifices  ;  the  New  Covenant,  with  the  most  pre- 
cious blood  of  the  Son  of  God ;  the  Covenant  of  Peace  with 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  by  an  oath  ;  and  that  with  David  concern- 
ing the  sceptre  and  throne  of  Israel,  with  an  oath  ;  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah,  as  now  administered  by  a  Royal  Priest,  Melchi- 
zedcck's  antitype,  is  also  confirmed  by  an  oath.  The  seals  of  all 
these  public  charters,  institutions,  or  covenants,  (for  these  words 
in  their  respective  prominent  attributes  fully  represent  them,) 
were,  then — the  Tree  of  Life,  the  Rainbow,  Sacrifice,  Circum- 
cision, Animal  Blood,  smeared  or  sprinkled,  (whence  came  the 
red  wafer  and  the  red  wax,)  tlie  Oath  of  God. 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  97 

Of  these  institutions  those  sealed  with  tTie  oath  of  God  are  the 
most  sublime.  "  The  covenant  confirmed  of  God  "  in  relation  to 
the  Messiah,  had  no  seal  but  the  oath  of  God.  Hence  the  two 
covenants  emblematic  of  its  virtues — the  mitre  and  the  throne — 
"were  solemnized  by  oaths.  The  covenant  of  peace  through 
blood,  and  covenant  of  royalty  and  power,  complete  the  oflficial 
glory  of  the  Messiah.  The  Lord  has  given  him  for  a  covenant, 
a  sacrifice,  a  purifier  to  his  people.  "He  is  made  of  God  to  us 
wisdom,  righteousness,  holiness,  and  redemption." 

Concerning  seals  or  signs,  wherever  God  has  annexed  them, 
we  have  to  remark,  that  they  are  either  monumental  of  the  facts 
on  which  the  covenant  is  founded,  or  they  are  pledges  and  seals 
securing  to  the  covenantees  the  blessings  of  the  institution. 

Circumcision  was  both  a  sign  and  a  seal.  So  Paul  affirms. 
Of  Abraham  he  says,  "  He  received  the  sign  of  circumcision," 
a  "  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  that  faith"  which  yet  uncircum- 
cised  he  possessed.  He  uses  terms  indicative  of  very  different 
ideas.  A  sign,  [seemeion,]  a  token  or  monument  of  a  transac- 
tion ;  and  a  seal,  [spJiragis,)  a  guarantee,  a  pledge  of  approba- 
tion, a  pledge  confirmatory.  Circumcision  was  then  a  sign  to 
all  the  circumcised,  a  token,  a  monument  significant  of  the  sepa- 
ration of  Israel  to  God  under  a  special  providence. 

Signs  intimate  the  same  things  to  all  the  proper  subjects  of 
them  ;  consequently,  as  a  sign,  circumcision  intimated  the  same 
thing  to  every  individual — Abraham,  Ishmael,  Isaac — or  any 
infant  son  or  servant  taken  into  that  institution.  But  it  sealed 
to  Abraham  what  it  did  not  seal  to  Ishmael,  Isaac,  or  any  other 
person.  It  was  to  him  a  seal  of  righteousness  before  possessed — 
a  "righteousness  of  faith."  This  it  could  not  be  to  them,  nor  to 
any  infant  or  unbelieving  Pagan.  Nor,  indeed,  was  it  ever  a 
seal  to  any  other  human  being  of  any  moral  excellence,  faith,  or 
righteousness  possessed  before  it.  Its  being  a  divine  token,  or 
mark  confirmatory  or  approbatory  of  the  single  faith  of  Abra- 
ham, was  altogether  peculiar ;  because  by  his  faith  he  became 
the  father  of  all  believers  in  all  ages  ;  and,  therefore,  the  cove- 
nant of  circumcision  was  given  to  him  alone  in  approbation  of 
his  faith.  His  faith  is  thus  made  a  model  faith.  If  a  million 
of  believing  men  had  been  circumcised  after  the  manner  of 
Abraham,  not  one  of  them  could  say  his  faith  was  a  model  faith, 
or  that  his  circumcision  was  a  divine  seal  approbatory  of  his 
faith,  nor  could  any  one  say  it  of  them.     On  this  subject  there 


9B  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

are  volumes  of  false  and  absurd  reasonings  from  men  who,  on 
other  subjects,  are  learned  and  rational. 

The  style  of  the  Apostle  is,  indeed,  itself  indicative  of  all  this 
difference.  He  says  "  he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision" — 
the  token  of  the  covenant — '*  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the 
faith."  It  was  the  token  and  a  seal.  To  all  it  was  the  token — 
to  Abraham  alone  it  was  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  a  faith 
before  possessed.  As  the  token,  it  was  common  to  all — as  a  seal, 
it  was  peculiar  to  one,  and  only  one  man  of  all  the  race. 

To  every  other  human  being  circumcised  according  to  the 
covenant,  it  signified  the  same  thing.  It  did  not  mean  one  thing 
to  A  and  another  to  B.  It  signified  no  spiritual  blessings,  it 
sealed  no  eternal  blessings  to  Isaac  more  than  to  Ishmael — to 
Jacob,  more  than  Esau — to  John,  more  than  to  Judas.  This  is 
true,  whether  contemplated  as  a  sign  or  a  seal.  The  seal  to  a 
bond  confirms  and  secures  just  the  specifications  of  the  bond ; 
and  neither  more  nor  less  than  the  specifications  to  every  one 
named  in  it.  Now,  Annas  and  Caiaphas,  Judas  and  Paul,  were 
just  as  proper  subjects  for  circumcision  as  David  or  Daniel,  as 
Moses  or  Aaron.  It  secured  only  the  provisions  of  that  cove- 
nant. But  neither  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  nor  re- 
mission of  sins,  nor  eternal  life,  were  among  the  provisions  of 
the  covenant  of  circumcision.  It,  therefore,  was  neither  the 
sign  nor  the  seal  of  them.  It  was  a  covenant  in  the  Jlesh,  per- 
taining to  tlie  Jlesh,  and  confined  to  the  jlesh,  specified  in  the  cove- 
nant. It  was  not  for  all  flesh,  but  for  some  flesh — for  that  flesh 
only  which  was  in  Abraham,  or  which  would  amalgamate  with 
the  flesh  of  Abraham.  Abraham's  son,  Abraham's  servant,  or 
any  one  with  or  without  faith,  that  would  join  with  them  in 
their  fortunes,  might  receive  it ;  but  no  one  else.  Indeed,  of  all 
covenants,  human  or  divine,  it  may  be  affirmed  that  their  bene- 
fits belong  alike  to  every  covenantee — that  whatever  is  legally 
covenanted  in  them  to  one,  belongs  alike  to  every  other  legal 
subject  of  them.  This  single  truth,  as  plain  as  any  other  Bible 
truth,  for  ever  settles  all  debates  among  reasonable  men  as  to 
the  provisions  of  this  or  any  other  covenant. 

The  covenant  with  Noah,  the  covenant  concerning  Christ,  the 
covenant  concerning  the  worldly  inheritance,  the  covenant  of 
the  priesthood,  the  covenant  of  the  sceptre,  the  covenant  at 
Mount  Sinai,  and  the  covenant  of  circumcision  are  all  alike  in 
this  particular.     Every  covenantee  inherits  equally  and  identi- 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  99 

cally  the  same  constitutional  or  chartered  rights  and  immuni- 
ties, just  as  every  naturalized  citizen  of  the  United  States  has 
all  the  same  constitutional  rights  and  privileges  of  every  other 
naturalized  citizen.  Every  one  in  Noah's  covenant,  every  first- 
born son  of  Aaron,  every  one  in  the  national  covenant  medi- 
ated by  Moses,  and  every  one  in  the  covenant  of  circumcision 
derived  the  same  advantages  from  the  covenant  of  which  he  was 
a  proper  subject. 

Paul,  indeed,  asks  and  answers  the  question  "  what  profit  ivas 
there  in  circumcision,"  and  "what  advantage  hath  the  Jew?" 
Many  advantages,  indeed,  were  connected  with  it.  But  what 
was  the  chief  advantage  ?  Regeneration  ?  Remission  of  sins  ? 
The  Holy  Spirit  ?  Life  everlasting  ?  No,  no :  not  any  one  of 
these — but  "  chiefly  to  them  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God." 
The  Gentiles  now  have  these  oi-acles  without  faith,  without  cir- 
cumcision, without  baptism.  This,  indeed,  makes  faith,  regene- 
ration, spiritual  and  eternal  salvation  possible  ;  and  this,  indeed, 
is  a  great  blessing.  So,  then,  the  matter  of  circumcision,  as  to 
its  advantage,  is  settled  by  high  authority.  It  gave  the  oracles 
of  God  in  keeping  to  the  Jewish  nation.  This  was  its  nighest 
approach  to  spiritual  blessings  ! 

But  circumcision  became  a  type.  Of  what  ?  The  circumci- 
sion of  the  heart.  The  manna  became  a  type,  the  Sabbath  be- 
came a  type,  the  stricken  rock  became  a  type,  Jordan  became  a 
type,  and  why  should  not  circumcision  become  a  type  ?  We, 
believing  Gentiles,  are  now  "  the  circumcision,"  because  (not 
in  the  flesh,  but)  "in  the  spirit  we  worship  God,  rejoice  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  have  no  confidence  in  the  flesh,"  neither  in 
cutting,  nor  washing,  nor  cleansing  the  flesh.  This  once  was 
the  outward  circumcision  in  the  flesh ;  but  neither  baptism  nor 
any  other  ordinance  came  in  room  of  it.  Such  talk  is  a  scandal 
to  the  age.  The  circumcision  of  the  heart  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
came  in  room  of  the  circumcision  of  the  flesh  by  the  knife  of  a 
Jewish  father  or  a  mother,  a  master  or  a  mistress.  Circumci- 
sion is  now  "that  of  the  heart,"  and  not  of  the  law  in  the  flesh, 
"  but  in  the  spirit,"  "  whose  praise"  (because  the  operation  is 
invisible)  "  is  not  of  man,  but  of  God."  The  ancient  prophets 
that  preached  concerning  Christ  and  his  kingdom  were  wont  to 
say,  "  Circumcise  the  foreskin  of  your  hearts."  "  Make  you  a 
new  heart,"  &c. 

It  was  the  stress  of  the  tempest  of  debate  that  first  compelled 


100  ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

a  portion  of  Protestant  Christendom  to  make  baptism  instead 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  stand  in  the  room  of  circumcision.  And  yet 
of  all  theological  logicians,  they  are  the  least  entitled  to  our  con- 
fidence who  can  make  the  sign  of  a  covenant  concerning  the  flesh, 
the  sign  of  a  covenant  concerning  the  spirit ; — who  can  tear 
away  the  seal  from  one  bond,  and  patch  in  its  stead  the  seal  of 
another  bond.  Or,  what  is  the  same  thing,  write  a  new  bond 
over  an  old  seal  I  From  such  logicians  and  theologians  we  all 
pray  for  a  deliverance. 

The  myriads  of  Jews  converted  to  the  faith  of  Jesus  as  the 
Messiah  that  were  baptized,  notwithstanding  their  former  cir- 
cumcision, and  the  myriads  of  baptized  Christian  Jews  that, 
during  much  of  the  apostolic  age,  continued  to  circumcise  their 
children,  one  would  think  might  have  thrown  some  obstacle  in 
the  way  of  such  reasoners  as  find  for  infant  baptism  a  pretext 
in  infant  circumcision.  They  have,  indeed,  a  faith  that  removes 
mountains  ; — a  faith  in  human  authority  that  removes  the  moun- 
tains interposed  by  Apostles  and  Prophets  between  their  pre- 
mises and  their  conclusions. 

That  Jesus  and  the  Holy  Twelve  had  all  been  circumcised  and 
afterwards  baptized ;  that  all  the  first  converts  to  Christianity 
were  circumcised  persons,  had  upon  them  the  sign  of  circum- 
cision, yet  commanded  every  one  to  be  baptized,  is,  in  their 
vision,  no  obstacle  to  the  theory  of  baptism  in  room  of  circum- 
cision. Hundreds  of  years  passed  away  before  any  one  thought 
of  making  baptism  a  substitute  for  infant  circumcision. 

Our  main  object,  indeed,  in  thus  inquiring  into  covenants, 
their  signs  and  seals,  is  rather  to  enforce  the  necessity  of  cove- 
nanting with  the  Lord,  than  to  descant  upon  the  false  reason- 
ings and  erroneous  conclusions  of  such  fathers  as  are  looked  up 
to  for  authority  in  introducing  a  new  covenant  for  infants  to 
sign  before  they  can  read  it,  or  hear  it  read.  Faith  and  repent- 
ance, of  which  we  have  taken  some  notice  in  former  essays,  are 
peculiar  to  no  dispensation  of  religion,  nor  to  any  age  of  the 
world.  Since  man  fell  till  the  present  moment,  faith  and  repent- 
ance have  always  been  indispensable  to  deliverance  from  sin. 
"  He  that  cometh  to  God  must  first  believe  that  he  is,  and  that 
he  is  a  rewarder  of  those  who  diligently  seek  him."  But  the 
institutions  and  charters  of  privilege  have  difi'ered  in  some  re- 
spects, as  time  has  advanced.  Covenants  of  promise  and  of 
privilege  have,  indeed,  always  been  in  existence ;  and  God's 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  101 

people  have  always  been  in  covenant  with  God.     The  gospel  is, 
indeed,  presented  in  the  form  of  a  covenant.     The  Messiah 
seals  it  as  his  covenant — "the  new,"  "the  better,"  "the  ever- 
lasting covenant."     He  is  himself  both  the  covenant,  and  the 
Mediator  of  it,  as  he  is  himself  the  victim,  the  altar,  and  the 
priest.    We  are  said  to  be  "w  Christ;^'  but  before  we  are  in 
him,  we  must  come  into  him  by  covenant.     He  is  the  oath  of 
God  accomplished,  and  we  take  the  vow ;  God  is  the  covenanter, 
Christ  the  covenant,  and  we  the  covenantees ;  we  are  recon- 
ciled to  God  through  him.    He  sealed  the  covenant  with  his  own 
blood.     The  Lord's  supper  is  the  pledge  of  it.     But  he  will  have 
us  to  die,  to  be  buried,  and  to  rise  again  for  him,  as  he  died, 
was  buried,  and  rose  again  for  us.     Hence  the  institution  of 
Christian  baptism.    We  must  pass  through  the  solemn  sign,  and 
must  lie  with  him  in  the  grave  and  rise  with  him  to  a  new  and 
better  life.    These  are  outward  signs  of  an  inward  and  true  and 
real  covenant  with  the  Lord,  by  and  through  which  we  indivi- 
dually, each  one  for  himself,  are  made  partakers  of  the  fulness 
of  the  blessings  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.     Every  covenant  pro- 
pounded by  God  to  man  since  his  fall  is  based  upon  sacrifice. 
No  intercourse  between  God  and  rebel  man  can  be  instituted 
upon  any  other  principle.     Every  Divine  stipulation  is  a  stipula- 
tion of  mercy  dictated  by  a  pure  benevolence,  a  Divine  philan- 
thropy, and  based  upon  such  a  sacrifice  as  inflexible  justice  and 
immaculate  purity  can  approbate  and  acquiesce  in.     There  is 
no  covenant  of  redemption  based  upon  human  effort  or  human 
merit.     All  God's  overtures  are  the  offspring  of  pure,  unmerited 
favour.     The  conditions  propounded  are  not  merely  to  justify 
God  before  the  universe,  though  that  must  be  always  secured ; 
but  benevolence  requires  that  man  should  believe  what  God 
says,  feel  in  harmony  with  all  his  requisitions,  and  obey  from 
his  heart  every  precept.     The  conditions  of  believing  what  God 
says  and  of  doing  what  God  commands,  are  all  conditions  of 
grace,  of  justice,  and  of  pure  benevolence.     God,  with  all  re- 
verence be  it  spoken,  can  make  no  sinful  man  happy  in  any 
other  way  than  the  gospel  propounds.     Our  duty,  our  honour, 
our  interest,  and  our  happiness  are  equally  consulted  and  se- 
cured in  accepting  the  covenant  of  life  through  the  obedience 
unto  death  of  God's  beloved  Son.     This  we  do  by  obeying  from 
the  heart  the  precepts  of  righteousness  and  mercy  delivered  to 
us  by  the  holy  Apostles.     Thus  we  enter  into  covenant  with 


102  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

God,  we  become  his,  and  he  becomes  ours  the  instant  we  obey 
from  the  heart  the  Apostles'  doctrine. 

Before  closing,  for  the  present,  the  whole  subject  of  covenant- 
ing, we  may  add  that  there  are  times,  occasions,  and  circum- 
stances requiring  us,  or,  at  least,  making  it  expedient  for  us,  to 
stipulate  private  and  personal  covenants  with  God — indeed, 
times  when  communities  may  and  ought  to  enter  into  covenant 
with  one  another  and  with  the  Lord.  We  can  adduce  good  ex- 
amples for  such  transactions  from  the  history  of  the  age  of  reve- 
lation. Individual  men  and  communities  of  good  men  may, 
and  indeed  in  some  cases  ought,  to  enter  into  a  covenant  with 
God.  Jacob,  on  his  way  to  Padan-Aram,  is  one  case  of  this  sort; 
and  Nehemiah  and  the  reformers  of  his  time  are  another  case 
in  point.     But  of  these  we  cannot  now  speak  particularly. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

FLESH    AND    SPIRIT — LIBERTY    AND    NECESSITY — ^NEW    INSTITUTION. 

It  was  observed  in  our  chapter  on  ^^  Covenants  of  Pi-omise'* 
that  those  vouchsafed  to  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  were 
finally  engrossed  and  developed  in  two  grand  social  institutions, 
called  "the  Old  and  New  Covenants.^'  Each  of  these  had  its 
own  peculiar  provisions,  precepts,  promises,  and  mediator. 
Moses  mediated  and  administered  the  one ;  Jesus  the  Messiah 
mediates  and  administers  the  other. 

These  great  institutions  are  very  improperly  called,  on  the 
title-page  of  our  Bibles,  "the  Old  and  New  Testaments."  "  Tes- 
taments are  of  no  force,"  said  Paul,  "while  the  testator  lives." 
Whether  a  true  or  false  version  of  the  original,  this,  certainly, 
is  a  true  saying.  The  last  will  and  testament  is  made  valid  and 
obligatory  by  the  death  of  the  testator.  But  neither  God  nor 
Jesus  Christ  made  two  last  wills  or  testaments.  Hence  the  title- 
page  of  the  apostolic  writings  usually  printed  "The  New  Tes- 
tament or  OUR  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,"  is  every  way 
inadmissible.  First,  a  neiv  testament  of  Jesus  Christ  implies 
that  there  was  an  old  one  !  Is  this  a  fact  ?  Again,  if  there  be 
two  testaments  of  Jesus  Clu'ist,  the  last  one  only  is  valid,  ac- 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  103 

cording  to  the  proper  meaning  of  the  word,  and  the  reasoning 
of  the  Apostle.  But  does  any  one  believe  that  Jesus  Christ 
made  first  one  will,  and  then  changed  it,  making  it  void,  by  a 
second — or  last  will  and  testament !  Yet  all  our  Bibles  pub- 
lished "6y  authority^"  perpetrate  this  great  mistake,  this  palpa- 
ble aberration  from  propriety.  Translate  it  "the  covenant  of 
Jesus  Christ,"  or  **a  new  covenant  administered  hy  Jesus  CJirist,'* 
and  we  speak  rationally,  scripturally,  and  intelligibly.  God  has 
given  to  mankind  in  the  Bible  two  great  covenants,  the  first  ad- 
ministered by  his  servant,  Moses,  the  second  by,his  Son,  Jesus 
Christ,  our  blessed  Lord.  The  former  is  the  old,  the  latter  the 
new  covenant.  By  a  figure  of  speech  very  common,  the  Jewish 
writings  are  called  the  old  covenant,  because  they  contain  it, 
and  grow  out  of  it ;  and  by  the  same  figure,  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures are  called  the  new  covenant,  because  they  contain  it  and 
originate  from  it. 

These  two  grand  social  institutions,  it  was  also  remarked,  are 
but  the  development  of  two  great  promises  made  to  Abraham  ; 
one  concerning  his  natural,  the  other  concerning  his  spiritual 
ofispring.  One  of  these  promises  is — "I  will  make  of  thee  a  great 
nation,  and  will  bless  him  that  blesses  thee,  and  curse  him  that 
curses  thee."  The  other  promise  is — "In  thee,"  that  is,  "w  thy 
seed,  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  One  family 
exhausts  the  first  covenant,  while  the  second  unites  in  one  com- 
munity all  the  faithful  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth.  The  first 
promises  to  all  its  subjects,  all  worldly  and  temporal  blessings  ; 
the  second  guarantees  to  all  its  subjects,  spiritual  and  eternal 
blessings. 

But  the  centre  of  attraction,  or  the  principle  of  association  in 
these  two  communities,  differs  as  radically  as  do  the  blessings  sti- 
pulated in  each  of  them ;  so  that  connection  with  the  one  commu- 
nity secures  no  interest  in  the  other.  The  flesh  of  Abraham  is 
the  centre  of  attraction  in  the  one,  while  the  faith  of  Abraham 
is  the  centre  of  attraction  in  the  other.  All  the  privileges, 
rights,  interests,  and  immunities  in  the  one  are  fleshly  and  tem- 
poral ;  all  the  rights,  interests,  and  immunities  in  the  other  are 
spiritual  and  eternal.  A  person  being  the  son  of  Abraham  by 
the  flesh  gives  him  no  interest  whatever  in  any  of  the  blessings 
of  a  son  of  Abraham  by  faith.  Neither  does  a  Gentile's  being 
a  son  of  Abraham  by  faith,  give  him  any  interest  whatever  in 
any  of  the  covenanted  blessings  of  a  son  of  Abraham  by  blood. 


104  .        ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

Every  thing  in  these  two  institutions  is  consistent  with  their 
respective  centres  of  attraction  or  principles  of  union.  Bless- 
ings and  curses,  temporal  and  fleshly,  are  the  rewards  and 
sanctions  of  the  one ;  while  blessings  and  curses,  spiritual  and 
eternal,  are  the  rewards  and  the  sanctions  of  the  other.  The 
ordinances  attached  to  the  first  covenant  are  called  "  carnal^* 
while  those  appended  to  the  new  are  ^^ spiritual "  The  inhe- 
ritance of  the  first  covenant  was  worldly.  Its  blessings  were  in 
the  basket  and  in  the  store,  in  the  flocks  and  herds,  in  fruitful 
seasons  and  abundant  harvests,  in  oil  and  wine,  in  milk  and 
honey,  in  victories  and  triumphs  over  their  national  and  per- 
sonal enemies.  Their  tabernacle  and  their  temple,  with  all  that 
appertained  to  them — their  altars  and  lavers,  their  tables  and 
candlesticks,  their  censers  and  incense,  their  gold  and  their 
gems,  their  priests  and  victims,  their  blood  and  water,  their  oil 
and  wine — their  music  and  their  dance,  their  trumpets  and  their 
cymbals,  their  feasts  and  their  fasts,  were  all  of  the  same  sen- 
sible, fleshly,  and  worldly  character,  suited  to  a  carnal,  worldly, 
and  unregenerated  nation  ;  every  citizen  of  which,  good  or  bad, 
was  a  member  of  the  church :  for  the  church  and  the  nation  of 
Israel,  were  not  only  commensurate,  but  identically  the  same. 
Their  suspensions  were  mere  temporary  separation  from  the 
public  assemblies,  and  their  great  excommunication  was  death 
according  to  the  law. 

Still,  under  that  national  and  worldly,  or  politico-religious  in- 
stitution, there  were  persons  who  had  faith  in  the  promised 
Messiah,  and  spiritual  illumination ;  who  saw  the  promised 
blessings  afar  off,  and  embraced  them,  and  walked  with  God. 
But  they  were  sanctified  and  saved  by  the  grace  and  spiritual 
provisions  of  another  institution — the  kernel  that  was  in  the 
shell  of  those  outward  symbols.  For  "  the  law  was  a  shadow," 
or  faint  adumbration  of  "good  things  to  come;"  not,  indeed, 
"  the  exact  image  of  them,"  but  a  general  outline,  through  which 
those  "led  by  the  Spirit"  were  inducted  into  the  holy  of  holies 
of  that  sublimely  allegoric  representation.  Still,  the  good  and 
the  bad  worshipped  in  the  same  sanctuary,  came  up  to  the  same 
festivals,  observed  all  the  same  rites,  and  shared  in  all  the 
national  blessings  and  calamities. 

They  had,  indeed,  legal  sacrifices,  a  legal  repentance,  and  a 
legal  remission  of  sins.  The  sinner  came  to  a  priest,  as  great  a 
sinner  as  himself,     lie  carried  his  lamb,  his  kid,  or  his  calf,  to 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  105 

the  altar.  He  laid  his  right  hand  upon  its  head,  confessed  his 
sin,  and  killed  it.  The  priest  piled  its  flesh  upon  the  altar, 
poured  out  or  sprinkled  its  blood,  while  the  fire  of  heaven  con- 
sumed it.  This  done,  the  legal  penalty  only  was  remitted.  It 
did  not  strengthen  the  heart,  nor  "make  him  perfect  who  did 
this  service,  as  pertained  to  his  conscience.^'  Hence,  their  sins 
were  again  "remembered  every  year,''  in  the  annual  atonements. 
And  even  the  most  faithful  and  believing  amongst  them  only  re- 
ceived a  final  and  plenary  remission  of  sins,  by  reason  of  the 
ransom  then  prospective  "for  the  redemption  of  the  transgres- 
sions" under  that  covenant,  that  they  who  were  then  called 
might  with  us  partake  in  the  blessing  of  the  eternal  inheritance. 

The  Jewish  institution,  and  the  people  under  it,  were  alike 
carnal.  "Carnal  ordinances,"  says  Paul,  "were  imposed  on 
them  until  the  time  of  reformation."  They  had  letter  and  sym- 
hoi,  but  they  had  not  the  spirit  nor  the  reality.  They  had,  in- 
deed, the  word  addressed  to  the  ear,  and  the  picture  to  the  eye ; 
but  that  which  was  spoken  they  neither  understood  nor  obeyed ; 
and  that  which  was  a  type  they  could  not  read,  "  for  they  could 
not  see  to  the  end  or  meaning  of  that  which  is  now  abolished." 
Paul,  that  greatest  of  commentators,  most  aptly  calls  it  letter, 
and  type,  and  shadow,  while  with  him  the  new  covenant  is  ^^  spirit, 
and  righteousness,  and  life"  The  letter  killeth,  while  the  spii'it 
giveth  life.  It  is  also  called  "  the  ministration  of  condemnation," 
while  the  gospel  is  called  "the  ministration  of  righteousness." 
The  former,  indeed,  was  gloriously  introduced,  but  much  more 
gloriously  the  latter. 

Still,  we  must  enter  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  through  its 
own  portico.  The  new  covenant  always  presupposes  the  know- 
ledge of  the  old.  The  reader  of  the  apostolic  writings  is  sup- 
posed to  have  read  or  learned  from  Moses  and  the  Prophets. 
The  gospel  presupposes  the  law.  It  was  a  school-master  to  in- 
troduce the  Messiah  to  our  acquaintance.  It  is  all  letter  and 
type;  but  we  receive  the  spirit  through  the  letter,  and  the 
reality  through  the  type.  "  The  law  was  given  by  Moses,  but 
the  grace  and  the  reality,  or  the  truth,  came  by  Jesus  Christ." 

As  the  body  to  the  spirit,  so  stood  the  Jewish  to  the  Christian 
institution  in  many  prominent  points  of  view.  As  the  spirit 
dwells  in  the  body,  so  the  gospel  dwelt  in  the  Levitical  institu- 
tion. When  that  died,  the  spirit,  or  that  indicated  by  all  its 
ordinances,  alone  survived.    So  that  while  that  religion  sancti- 


106  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

fied  to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh  only,  the  Christian  sanctifies 
the  spirit,  and  through  it  the  soul  and  body.  "  We,  therefore, 
serve  in  the  newness  of  spirit,  and  not  in  the  oldness  of  the  let- 
ter.'' "  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  justification  to  every 
one  that  believeth."  The  ritual  of  Moses,  says  Paul,  "stood 
only  in  meats,  and  drinks,  and  divers  ordinances  concerning 
the  flesh,  imposed  on  the  Jews  until  the  time  of  reformation." 

We,  then,  serve  in  a  "  better  tabernacle"  than  did  the  Jewish 
people.  For  their  animal  sacrifices,  we  have  the  slain  Lamb  of 
God.  For  their  deliverance  from  penal  temporal  sufierings, 
through  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats,  we  have  "justification 
from  all  things" — through  faith  in  the  blood  of  the  Messiah. 
For  their  legal  purification  by  "  the  water  of  separation,"  we 
have  the  sanctification  of  the  spirit,  through  faith  in  the  blood 
of  Christ,  and  baptism  into  his  death.  For  their  oil  of  conse- 
cration, we  have  the  anointing  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  which 
we  are  led  into  all  truth  and  holiness.  For  their  national  adop- 
tion, we  have  a  personal  and  filial  adoption  into  the  family  of 
God,  by  which  we  feel  that  we  are  sons,  and  can  say,  "  Our 
Father,  who  art  in  heaven." 

.  The  doctrine  of  a  future  life,  and  of  the  immortality  of  man, 
constituted  no  part  of  the  Jew's  religion.  There  is  not  one 
promise  of  eternal  life,  not  one  word  of  the  heavenly  inherit- 
ance in  any  part  of  the  Jewish  institution.  Neither  is  there  one 
threat  of  any  punishment  after  death.  Indeed,  neither  salva- 
tion nor  damnation,  in  the  Christian  sense  of  these  terms,  ever 
occurs  in  any  portion  of  the  writings  of  Moses,  so  far  as  they 
respect  the  Jewish  nation,  religion,  or  peculiarities.  The  law 
was  added  to  an  antecedent  promise,  as  Paul  affirms.  So  that 
the  Jewish  institution  is  to  be  contemplated  as  an  episode — an 
intercalary  or  parenthetic  dispensation.* 

It  was  added  to  the  antediluvian  revelations.  Enoch,  the 
seventh  from  Adam,  is  one  of  those  ancient  prophets  who  taught 
a  future  life,  a  future  condemnation  of  wicked  men ;  and  in  his 

*  Bishop  Warburton,  in  his  Divine  Legation  of  Moses,  argues,  from  the  silence 
of  Moses  on  the  subject  of  future  rewards  and  punishments,  that  he  was  dirinely 
inspired,  inasmuch  as  all  the  founders  of  antecedent  states  and  empires  founded 
their  empires  upon  that  basis;  or  sanctioned  their  laws  by  the  penalties  of  eternal 
rewards.  But  his  lordship  seemed  not  to  have  observed  that  Moses  needed  not 
Buch  enactments  or  sanctions,  inasmuch  as  the  nation  which  he  formed  was  in 
possession  of  that  knowledge  before  he  was  born.  Uis  learned  and  ingenious  argu- 
ments on  this  main  branch  of  his  subject  are  regarded  aa  a  splendid  sophism. 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  107 

own  personal  translation  to  heaven,  God  gave  a  practical  demon- 
stration of  the  certainty  of  a  state  of  immortality  for  those  who 
walked  with  God  according  to  the  rules  prescribed  for  them. 
That  such  rules  were  given,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
where  no  law  is,  there  can  be  neither  obedience  nor  disobe- 
dience. 

Evident,  then,  it  must  be  to  all  who  reflect  on  Scripture  pre- 
mises that  the  object  of  the  Jewish  institution  was  not  to  reveal 
life  and  immortality,  nor  to  prescribe  rules  for  the  attainment 
of  them.  Moses  and  his  law  are  better  defined  by  Paul  to  the 
Hebrews.  When  comparing  him  with  the  character  and  official 
grandeur  of  "the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our  religion," 
Paul  represents  Moses  as  having  lived  and  acted  for  "  a  testi- 
mony of  the  things  that  were  to  he  spoken  in  after  times.''  God 
gave  the  mould  or  pattern  to  Moses,  and  Moses  cast  the  type. 
He  gave  the  letter  which  leads  us  to  Christ  and  which  reveals 
Christ  to  us.  To  this  the  Prophets  added  much  in  after  times. 
Still,  Moses  and  his  tabernacle  and  worship  are  but  the  patterns 
of  things  in  the  heavens — a  shadow  of  good  things,  then  future, 
but  now  come. 

The  covenant  of  circumcision  and  of  the  Law,  as  administered 
by  Moses,  had,  therefore,  no  special,  direct,  or  specific  relation 
to  a  spiritual  people  or  a  spiritual  institution.  Circumcision, 
though  before  the  law,  is  by  the  Messiah  himself  incorporated 
with  it ;  because,  as  we  have  shown,  that  covenant  was  one  of 
the  "  covenants  of  promise"  engrossed  in  the  national  institution 
given  to  the  twelve  tribes.  The  words  of  the  Messiah  are  re- 
markable :  "  If  a  person  receives  circumcision  on  the  Sabbath 
day,"  (being  sometimes  the  eighth  day,)  says  he,  "that  the  law 
of  Moses  be  not  broken,  why  thus  speak  of  him  whom  tho 
Father  has  sent  into  the  world  ?"  &c. 

Thus  we  are  directed  to  the  gospel,  as  a  new  and  sublime  de- 
velopment of  God's  philanthropy,  prepared  for  an  educated 
world.  The  Jews  were  all  minors,  under  tutors  and  governors, 
until  the  fulness  of  time,  when  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  born  of 
woman,  and  made  under  the  law  himself,  that  he  might  redeem 
his  own  people  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  and  introduce  a  new 
system,  bringing  in  an  everlasting  redemption  for  us. 

The  Christian  institution  is  addressed  to  the  understanding,  the 
heart,  the  conscience.  It  first  presents  itself  to  the  understand- 
ing.   It  works  its  way  into  the  heart.    It  seizes  the  aflfections 


lOS  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

and  induces  men  to  come,  not  to  be  carried  or  borne  by  physical 
necessity  to  Christ.  "  A  willing  people  in  the  day  of  thy  power 
shall  come  to  thee."  Christianity  presupposes  that  its  subjects 
shall  first  be  taught  by  Moses,  and  then  come  to  Christ.  No 
man  can  come  to  Christ  unless  God  induces  him  to  come,  by  the 
former  intimations  given  by  Moses  and  the  Prophets.  "If 
they  will  not  hear  them,"  they  never  can,  they  never  will  come 
to  Christ ;  "  they  would  not  be  persuaded  though  one  rose  from 
the  dead." 

Not  so  the  antecedent  institution.  Men  were  by  necessity 
born  members  of  it.  There  was  no  appeal  to  the  understanding, 
no  addresses  to  the  conscience,  no  motives  addressed  to  the 
heart  to  win  over  a  people  to  the  Jevdsh  institution.  They 
were  Jews,  not  by  choice,  but  by  necessity.  They  were  com- 
pelled to  be  members  of  that  church,  just  as  they  were  compel- 
led to  be  born.  They  were,  indeed,  born  of  the  flesh,  and  not 
of  the  spirit,  as  preparatory  to  admission  into  that  church. 

No  one  preached  to  the  Jews  that  they  must  be  born  again  to 
enter  into  their  kingdom  of  God.  "We  have  no  regeneration  in 
the  law  of  Moses.  The  Jewish  elect  are  all  chosen  in  Abra- 
ham's flesh.  Hence,  there  never  was  a  missionary  sent  out  of 
the  Jewish  Church  to  bring  into  it  any  one  not  born  of  the  flesh 
of  Abraham.  There  was  no  gospel  in  the  law  but  for  the  Jews. 
Their  inheritance  was  on  earth,  and  their  title  to  it  was  blood, 
and  not  faith, — natural,  and  not  supernatural  birth.  Hence  the 
perplexity  of  Nicodemus,  when  he  heard  the  doctrine  of  the 
necessity  of  intelligence,  and  a  new  birth,  in  order  to  entrance 
into  the  new  kingdom  of  God. 

A  few  proselytes  from  a  few  nations  were,  on  their  own  appli- 
cation, in  certain  cases,  admitted  into  that  community.  To 
these,  certain  privileges  were  extended  ;  but  the  genius,  charac- 
ter, and  aim  of  that  institution  was  not  catholic.  It  had  the 
flesh  of  the  Messiah  in  solemn  keeping  for  fifteen  hundred 
years — and,  therefore,  did  only  admit  of  a  few  proselytes.  Its 
"proselytes  of  justice,"  or  its  real  proselytes,  (for  as  for  those 
of  "  the  gate,"  we  have  no  authentic  evidence ;  they  seem  to  be 
a  modern  invention,)  were,  on  full  conviction  and  a  solemn  de- 
claration of  their  willhigness  to  be  governed  by  the  whole  law  of 
Moses,  admitted  to  circumcision  ;  and  so  soon  as  healed  from 
the  wound  inflicted  in  the  performance  of  that  bloody  rite,  they 
were  plunged  into  a  cistern  of  water  by  one  single  immersion  ; 


ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  109 

and  thus  incorporated  into  the  Jewish  nation.     So  teach  some 
of  the  Jewish  Rabbis. 

Still,  this  provision  for  the  benefit  of  a  few  worshippers  of  the 
true  and  only  living  God,  in  no  way  changes  the  general  and 
appropriate  character  of  that  institution.  Its  proper  subjects 
were  not  circumcised  to  make  them  members  of  the  Abrahamic 
or  Mosaic  church,  but  to  mark  them  as  such ;  the  church  and 
nation  being  always  coextensive.  There  W9,s,  therefore,  no  ne- 
cessity whatever  for  any  one  to  be  born  either  of  the  spirit  or  of 
water,  to  become  a  member  of  the  Jewish  community,  or  to  par- 
ticipate in  its  honours  and  privileges. 

On  the  contrary,  Christianity  is  catholic  in  its  spirit,  and  pro- 
selyting in  its  character.  It  contemplates  a  great  community, 
gathered  out  of  every  nation,  kindred,  tongue,  and  people.  It 
makes  provision  for  them  all.  Jesus  was  born  a  Jew,  and  came 
first  to  his  own  family  and  church,  and,  to  confirm  the  covenant 
made  unto  the  fathers,  he  tendered  to  them  of  the  circumcision 
the  blessings  of  membership  in  his  new  institution.  He  confined 
his  personal  labors  to  his  own  people.  He  informs  every  man 
in  Judea,  by  some  one  of  the  seventy  heralds,  that  the  new  king- 
dom of  God  was  soon  to  appear.  After  his  death,  born  again 
from  the  dead,  literally  and  truly  regenerated,  he  feels  no  more 
the  ties  of  Jewish  blood,  and  sends  his  twelve  illustrious  heralds 
into  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  to  gather  out  of  them  a  people 
for  his  name.  He  begins  with  the  Jews,  proceeds  to  the  Sama- 
ritans, and  thence  to  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  He  founds  a 
new  kingdom  under  a  large  commission.  He  sends  them  into 
the  whole  world,  and  commands  them  to  convert  all  nations. 
He  establishes  the  doctrine  of  personal  liberty,  of  freedom  of 
choice,  and  of  personal  responsibility,  by  commanding  every 
man  to  judge,  reason,  and  act  for  himself.  "  Preach  the  gos- 
pel'' to  the  whole  human  race — "to  every  creature,"  is  his  be- 
nevolent precept.  This  is  truly  a  catholic  spirit,  and  worthy  of 
all  admiration. 

There  are  now  no  more  fleshly  or  family  distinctions.  There 
are  now  no  hereditary  rights  and  honours  as  respects  access  to  the 
person  of  the  Messiah.  There  is  no  natural  relation  to  him  that 
gives  any  sort  of  claim,  right,  or  privilege  spiritual.  Parents 
and  children  are  now  alike  to  act  for  themselves.  It  is  he,  and 
only  he,  "  who  believes  and  is  baptized,  that  shall  be  saved.'* 
In  the  Lord's  kingdom  there  is  neither  Jew  nor  Gentile,  Barba- 

10 


110  ANTECEDENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

rian  nor  Scythian,  bond  nor  free.  Indeed,  there  is  neither  male 
nor  female,  parent  nor  child,  under  his  administration.  Intelli- 
gence and  candour,  faith  and  obedience,  are  supposed  to  be  pos- 
sessed by  every  member  of  Christ's  kingdom.  There  are  not 
two  classes  of  church  members  in  Christ's  church,  any  more 
than  there  are  not  two  sorts  of  citizens  in  the  United  States. 
There  are  no  patricians  nor  plebeians,  no  feudal  barons  nor 
feudal  serfs,  amongst  all  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus.  All  are 
one  in  rank  and  privilege  in  Christ's  kingdom.  It  is  not  flesh, 
but  spirit,  that  characterizes  Christian  membership.  The  Har- 
binger anciently  preached,  when  preparing  a  people  for  the 
Lord,  "Think  not  to  say  that  you  have  Abraham  for  your 
father."  No  hereditary  privileges  now.  "  Repent,  every  one  of 
you,  and  bring  forth  fruits  worthy  of  repentance." 

The  Christian  church  is  the  only  perfect  cradle  of  human 
liberty,  as  it  is  the  only  proper  school  of  equal  rights  and  immu- 
nities on  earth.  It  commands  every  man  to  think,  speak,  and 
act  for  himself.  It  asks  not  even  a  parent  to  stand  or  fall  for 
his  child.  It  knows  no  sponsorship,  no  godfather,  nor  god- 
mother. It  asks  no  father  to  make  a  profession  for  his  child. 
It  commands  him  to  "  bring  up  his  children  in  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord."  It  guaranties  freedom  of  thought,  of 
speech,  and  of  action,  to  every  citizen  under  the  Messiah's  reign — 
provided  only,  he  speaks  and  acts  as  the  oracles  of  God  require. 
The  great  doctrine  of  a  personal  accountability  is  made  the 
foundation  of  personal  liberty.  It  teaches  that  every  man  shall 
give  an  account  of  himself  to  God.  And  as  there  shall  be  no 
proxies  in  the  future  and  eternal  judgment,  so  there  must  be 
none  in  Christ's  kingdom  on  earth.  From  these  sublime  facts 
spring  all  rational  liberty  of  thought  and  action  on  the  greatest 
choice  which  man  can  make :  whom  he  shall  acknowledge,  love, 
and  serve  as  his  God,  and  in  what  way  and  manner  he  shall 
best  serve  him. 

Both  Joshuas — he  that  led  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  into 
Canaan,  and  our  Joshua,  "the  great  Captain  of  Salvation," 
**  who  leads  many  sons  to  glory,"  say,  "  Choose  you  this  day 
whom  you  shall  serve."  "If  the  Lord  be  God,  serve  him  ;  but 
if  Baal  be  god,  serve  him,"  Previous  examination  of  the  pre- 
tensions of  the  candidates  for  our  suffrage  is  presupposed.  No 
one  can  choose  without  consideration  and  comparison.  Hence 
infants  cannot  choose  wliom  they  should  serve,  and  whose  name 


ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  Ill 

shall  be  stamped  upon  them,  "because  they  cannot  consider  and 
compare  rival  candidates. 

But  were  not  the  babes  of  Israel  circumcised;  and  did  not 
that  bind  them  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers  ?  Circumcision 
bound  no  man  morally  or  religiously.  It  was  merely  the  sign 
of  a  covenant  hetiveen  God  and  Abraham.  The  persons  whom 
Joshua  commanded  to  make  a  choice  had  all  been  circumcised. 
The  female  infants  uncircumcised  were  neither  more  bound  nor 
more  free  in  moral  and  religious  obligation  than  the  circum- 
cised male  infants.  If  one  infant  is  bound  by  circumcision  or 
baptism  to  the  religion  of  its  father,  then  all  are  ;  for  these  rites 
are  of  the  same  significance  and  of  the  same  obligation  to  all. 
Indeed,  no  Jew  ever  supposed  that  his  circumcision  morally 
obliged  him :  for  without  one  single  demur  of  this  kind,  not 
only  Joshua  commanded  the  circumcised  to  choose,  but  so  did 
the  Messiah  and  the  twelve  Apostles  command  all  whom  they 
addressed  to  choose  whom  they  should  serve,  and  in  what  man- 
ner they  should  serve  him.  Hence  myriads  of  circumcised 
Jews  in  the  age  of  the  Apostles  renounced  Judaism  and  em- 
braced Christianity,  circumcision  to  the  contrary  notwithstand- 
ing- 

We  have  said  that  "  circumcision"  means  the  same  thing  to 
every  circumcised  person  of  the  same  class.  To  Ishmael,  Isaac, 
Jacob,  and  Esau,  it  means  just  the  same  thing.  So  does  every 
ordinance  to  all  the  subjects  of  it.  If  Jesus  commands  infants 
to  be  baptized,  it  morally  or  politically  obliges  them  all  to  the 
same  course  of  action.  If  it  binds  one  to  the  religion  of  his  pa- 
rents, it  binds  all ;  and  then  it  is  in  every  case  a  barrier  inter- 
posed between  God  and  human  liberty  of  choice ; — every  bap- 
tized infant  is  bound  to  follow  the  religious  belief  and  profession 
of  his  parent  or  godfather  without  consideration,  comparison, 
or  choice.  According  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  Martin  Lu- 
ther and  John  Calvin  morally  ofiended  God  in  becoming  Pro- 
testants. The  Jew  as  well  as  the  Mussulman  sins  in  becoming 
a  Christian.  The  Churchman  and  the  Presbyterian  sins  against 
God  in  becoming  a  Baptist,  a  Methodist,  or  a  Moravian.  If  God 
has  given  this  power  to  parents,  and  if  children  are  thus  obliged 
by  parental  vows  for  them,  then  is  it  not  preposterous  ever  after 
to  teach  them  to  think,  to  reason,  and  to  act  for  themselves  in 
any  moral  concern,  if  in  the  greatest  of  all  concerns  they  are 


112  ANTECEDENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

compelled  by  divine  authority  to  be  thus  servile  and  obsequious 
to  the  will  of  another  ? 

No  religion  preached  on  earth  is  so  favourable  to  human  li- 
berty as  the  Christian.  Indeed,  it  prescribes  the  only  rational 
foundation  of  liberty  ever  submitted  to  the  human  understand- 
ing. This  it  does  by  making  every  man's  destiny  for  ever  de- 
pend upon  his  own  choice.  If  he  must  be  judged  for  himself,  he 
must  think  and  choose  for  himself — is  as  sound  logic,  as  sound 
theology,  as  were  ever  preached.  His  father  cannot  act  for  him 
unless  he  be  judged  for  him.  No  Pedobaptist  has,  therefore, 
fully  abjured  popery.  He  carries  a  pope  in  his  bosom,  so  long 
as  he  will  vow  for  his  child,  and  then  by  the  force  of  that 
vow  teach  his  son  that  he  is  obliged  to  join  his  father's  church, 
because  in  that  church  he  was  sealed,  signed,  and  delivered 
by  the  divine  warrant  of  infant  baptism. 

There  is,  then,  a  doctrine  of  liberty  and  necessity  in  the 
American  church  as  respects  church  membership  and  religious 
charters,  as  well  as  in  the  schools  o{  moral  philosophy.  This 
new  species  of  ecclesiastical  fatalism  is  not  confined  to  Calvin- 
ists,  but  extends  into  the  bosom  of  the  Arminian  churches. 
They  all,  more  or  less,  and  sometimes  while  disavowing  it,  im- 
pose their  solemn  rites  upon  their  infant  offspring,  by  dedicating 
them  to  God ;  and  that  in  connection  with  certain  ecclesiastic 
formulas  of  faith  and  manners.  They  say,  "  Only  dedicate  them 
to  God."  Only  dedicate  them  ! !  This  is  still  worse.  Dedicate 
them  as  a  thing,  a  chattel,  or  a  person !  Such  dedication  is  not 
named  in  the  Bible  nor  in  the  oracles  of  Christian  reason  and 
faith.*  I  have  sometimes  listened,  not  with  admiration  of  the 
wisdom,  but  with  astonishment  at  the  weakness,  of  some  of  our 
hoary  doctors,  descanting  upon  the  great  advantages  of  infant 
dedication.  Strange,  thought  I,  that  neither  Moses  nor  the 
Prophets,  neither  Christ  nor  his  Apostles,  ever  spoke  one  word 
in  commendation  of  dedicating  a  person  to  the  Lord,  infant  or 
adult.  To  dedicate  a  thmj  is,  indeed,  intelligible ;  because  it 
has  no  soul  in  it  to  dedicate  itself — but  to  speak  of  dedicating 


*  Persons  having  hearts  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  may,  by  the  people,  be  set 
apart  or  consecrated  to  certain  services,  in  strict  propriety  of  speech.  And  in 
another  sense,  typical  and  fleshly  persons  and  things  were  dedicated  under  the 
law,  to  serve  according  to  the  letter,  where  spirituality  was  not  required.  But  to 
dedicate  to  a  spiritual  service  those  not  having  a  spiritual  mind,  is  without  law 
and  without  e:Lample. 


ANTECEDENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  1 13 

any  thing  with  a  soul  in  it  to  the  spiritual  'service  of  the  Lord, 
as  it  appears  to  me,  shocks  all  common  sense.  On  this  subject, 
as  well  as  some  others,  our  theological  dictionaries  and  "Ency- 
clopedias of  Religious  Knowledge"  are  at  fault.  They  can 
quote  no  passage  in  which  a  person  is  dedicated  to  any  service — 
not  even  consecrated,  or  set  apart,  unless  possessing  a  spiritual 
mind.* 

To  dedicate  infants  to  the  Lord  is,  therefore,  wholly  a  papisti- 
cal notion,  a  delusion  of  the  imagination,  an  article  of  spiritual 
traffic  by  those  who  deal  in  the  wares  and  merchandise  of  the 
great  ecclesiastic  emporium,  "spiritually  called  Babylon  and 
Egypt,  where  also  our  Lord  was  crucified."  It  is  an  ingenious 
contrivance  to  rob  them  of  a  property,  a  right  of  the  value  of 
which  they  can  form  no  correct  estimate,  and  for  which  the 
whole  world  would  be  no  equivalent.  I  sincerely  pity  the  youth 
who  has  thus  been  piously  wronged  of  one  of  the  dearest  rights 
and  noblest  privileges  ever  guaranteed  to  man.  Enslaved  he  is 
to  a  set  of  opinions  thus  imposed  upon  him,  under  pretence  of 
a  divine  authority,  being  told  that  vows  undertaken  and  made 
for  him  must  be  assumed  by  himself,  for  that  he  is  under  cove- 
nant to  keep  them. 

The  Jew  was,  by  what  some  call  fate,  obliged  to  be  a  Jew. 
He  had  no  choice  as  to  the  covenant  under  which  he  should  live, 
and  whose  sign  he  should  wear  deeply  inscribed  upon  his  flesh. 
But  under  the  Christian  institution  every  one  is  called  upon  to 
choose  his  own  master  and  his  own  associates.  Perfect  liberty 
is  extended  to  all,  requiring  from  all  deliberation,  examination, 
and  decision.  "Whosoever  willeth,  let  him  come  and  drink  of 
the  water  of  life  freely." 

The  New  or  Christian  Institution  is  the  full  development  of 
the  divine  philanthropy.  It  is  not  a  Hebrew,  Greek,  or  Roman 
Catholic  institution,  but  simply  a  catJiolic  institution.  It  is  not 
the  starlight,  the  moonlight,  the  twilight,  but  the  sunlight  deve- 
lopment of  the  divine  philanthropy.  Its  promises  are  free  and 
ample,  and  rich  in  the  choicest  blessings  which  God  can  bestow 


*  Hannah,  it  is  alleged,  dedicated  her  son  to  the  Lord.  Neither  by  circum- 
cision nor  by  baptism !  She  asked,  in  prayer,  for  a  son,  and  vowed  to  give  Jiim 
to  the  Lord,  if  he  would  hear  her  prayer.  The  Lord  gave  her  a  son,  and  she 
kept  her  vow.  When  weaned,  she  returned  him  to  the  Lord— took  him  to  the  house 
of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh,  and  left  him  there  to  be  educated.  Is  this  the  dedication 
of  those  who  plead  for  infant  baptism  !    If  not,  why  pervert  it  to  such  a  use  t 

10* 


114  ANTECEDENTS  OP   BAPTISM. 

upon  man  as  he  now  is.  It  addresses  man  as  he  is — an  animal, 
intellectual,  and  moral  being  in  ruins ;  and  for  no  other  purpose 
but  to  make  him  what  he  ought  to  be.  In  contrast  with  every 
system  in  the  universe,  it  is  purely  a  spiritual  system.  It  begins 
with  the  heart  of  man.  It  transcribes  the  will  of  God,  expressed 
in  the  law  of  righteousness  and  holiness,  upon  the  table  of  the 
human  heart.  God,  in  this  New  Institution,  gives  this  law  not 
into  the  hand  of  a  mediator,  and  then  into  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  but  he  gives  them  into  the  hearts  of  all  the  covenantees. 
He  makes  them  all  spiritually  intelligent.  Not  a  citizen  in  his 
kingdom  can  be  found  ignorant  of  the  Lord.  They  "know  him 
from  the  least  to  the  greatest."  They  are  an  enlightened  and 
spiritual  people.  Of  such  a  people  "he  is  not  ashamed  to  be 
called  their  God."  He  makes  them  his  people — he  becomes  their 
God,  and  declares  that  he  will  remember  "their  sins  and  their 
iniquities  no  more."  Beyond  these  blessings,  man  can  ask  for 
nothing  more  in  order  to  spiritual  happiness.  As  an  animal 
being,  he  may  for  a  time  need  food  and  raiment.  But  these  are 
guaranteed  to  him  on  certain  conditions.  If  he  ask  for  them 
and  work  for  them,  God  has  promised  them.  And  as  for  the 
future,  the  infinite  and  eternal  future,  the  universe  is  his.  He 
will  obtain  the  freedom  of  the  eternal  city.  The  "  things  to 
come"  are  all  his.  Such  is  the  inheritance  attached  to  the  new 
institution.  It  is,  indeed,  beyond  the  river  Jordan.  But,  while 
in  the  wilderness  of  sin,  he  may  eat  the  mystic  manna,  drink 
of  the  spiritual  rock,  and  walk  by  the  guidance  of  the  cloud, 
illumined  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  till  he  behold  the  "  clearer  light 
of  an  eternal  day." 

The  provisions  of  this  institution,  so  ample,  so  rich,  and  so  en- 
during, have  cost  a  very  great  price,  and  call  for  a  very  thorough 
renunciation  of  oneself  on  the  part  of  all  who  would  partake  of 
its  blessings.  Hence  its  coiulitions  are  in  harmony  with  the 
liberality  of  its  provisions  and  the  dignity  of  its  Author.  It  can- 
not be  merited,  but  must  be  received  as  a  perfect  gratuity.  The 
conditions,  then,  are  not  the  conditions  of  a  purchase,  but  of  a 
free  donation.  God  bestows  its  blessings  in  a  way  tlie  most 
blissful  to  the  recipient.  He  simply  requires  a  surrender  of 
his  own  will,  and  a  consecration  of  his  person  to  the  glory  of 
his  God  and  his  Redeemer.  He  is  bought  with  a  price  of  such 
inconceivable  value  as  to  make  it  his  duty  and  honour  to  give 
himself  away  for  ever  to  Him  that  ransomed  him.     But  that 


ANTECEDENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  115 

very  surrender  is  made  the  unwasting  spring  of  eternal  consola- 
tion and  bliss  to  him.  He  drinks  more  liberal  draughts  of  con- 
solation from  the  conditions  of  pardon  and  salvation  than  if  he 
could  have  bought  it  himself.  For  when  God  asks  him  to  give 
himself  away  to  him,  God  gives  himself  to  him  in  every  way 
that  he  can  enjoy  him  now  and  for  ever. 

Truly  this  is  a  gracious  institution.  If  the  law  was  given  by 
Moses,  truly  the  grace  and  the  reality  have  come  to  us  by  Jesus 
Christ.  Man  blesses  not  himself,  but  is  blessed  in  obeying  the 
gospel.  Faith,  repentance,  and  baptism  are,  therefore,  selected 
as  the  media  of  communication  of  all  spiritual  blessedness  to 
man  in  entering  into  covenant  with  God. 

The  world  called  Christian  has  long  since  decided  that  three 
things  are  essential  to  the  Christian  profession  ; — that  a  person 
must  believe,  and  repent,  and  be  baptized,  before  he  can  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  "the  church  of  the 
living  God,  the  pillar  and  the  support  of  the  truth."  The  con- 
stitution of  the  Christian  church,  it.seems,  requires  all  this. 
Hence  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  as  reported  by  Luke,  develop 
this  as  the  universal  law  for  Jew,  Samaritan,  or  Greek.  Not 
one  exception  in  Jerusalem,  Samaria,  or  to  the  uttermost  parts 
of  the  earth.  The  order  was.  Hear,  believe,  repent,  and  be  bap- 
tized, every  one  of  you.  Five  things  were  essential  to  conver- 
sion : — preaching,  hearing,  believing,  repenting,  and  heing  baptized. 
The  Apostles  preached,  the  people  heard,  then  believed,  then 
repented,  then  were  baptized,  and  then  went  on  their  way  re- 
joicing in  the  remission  of  their  sins,  the  reception  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  the  hope  of  eternal  life. 

The  nice  connection  and  intimate  dependence  of  these  items 
will  now  call  for  clear  and  ample  development.  Faith,  repent- 
ance unto  life,  the  covenants  of  promise,  and  the  new  institution, 
being  now  introduced  to  the  consideration  of  the  attentive  reader, 
we  shall  next  furnish  a  few  chapters  on  Christian  baptism. 


BOOK   SECOND. 
Action  of  iSaptism* 

The  Proposition. — Immersion  in  wafer  into  the  name  of  tJie  Fa- 
ther, and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  the  one  only 
Christian  Baptism. 

CHAPTER  I. 

BAPTO. 

Argument  1. — Bapto,  the  root  of  Baptizo,  whence  the  adopted  words 
baptize  and  haptism,  like  all  other  radical  words  denoting  specific  ac- 
tion, never  loses  its  specific  sense  in  its  derivatives. 

In  the  commission  which  the  Messiah  gave  to  his  Apostles  for 
converting  the  nations,  he  commanded  three  things  to  be  done, 
indicated  by  three  very  distinct  and  intelligible  terms,  viz.  ma- 
theteiisate,  baptizontes,  didaskontes.  Unfortunately  one  of  these 
three  Greek  words  has  become  a  subject  of  much  controversy. 
While  all  agree  that  the  first  term  may  be  literally  and  properly 
rendered  make  disciples,  and  the  last  teaching  them,  the  second, 
not  "being  translated  but  transferred  into  our  language,  is  by 
some  understood  to  mean  sprinkling  ;  by  others,  pouring  ;  by  a 
third  class,  immey^sing ;  and  by  a  fourth  class,  purifying  them 
into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

Fortunately,  the  meaning  of  any  word,  Hebrew,  Greek,  Latin, 
or  English,  is  a  question,  not  of  opinion,  but  a  question  oi  fact; 
and,  being  a  plain  question  of  fact,  it  is  to  be  ascertained  by 
competent  witnesses,  or  by  a  sufficient  induction  of  particular 
occurrences  of  the  word  at  difiercnt  times,  on  various  subjects, 
and  by  difi'erent  persons.  All  good  dictionaries,  in  all  languages, 
are  made  upon  a  full  examination  of  particular  occurrences — 
upon  a  sufficient  induction  of  distinct  instances — and  convey 
the  true  meaning  of  a  word  at  any  given  period  of  its  history. 

The  action,  then,  which  Jesus  Christ  commanded  to  be  done 

116 


ACTION   OF   BAPTISM.  117 

in  the  word  baptizo,  is  to  be  ascertained  just  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  the  action  enjoined  in  matlieteuo,  or  that  commanded  in 
didasko,  its  associates  in  the  commission.  "We  ask  no  other  law 
or  tribunal  for  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  baptizo  than  for  as- 
certaining the  sense  of  matlieteuo  or  didasko.  They  are  all  to 
be  determined  philologicallj,  as  all  other  foreign  and  ancient 
terms,  by  the  well-established  canons  of  interpretation.  From 
a  candid,  judicious,  and  impartial  application  of  these  laws, 
there  is  not  the  least  difficulty  in  the  case. 

There  is,  indeed,  less  difficulty  in  ascertaining  the  meaning 
of  the  word  baptizo  than  that  of  either  of  the  other  words  stand- 
ing with  it  in  the  commission ;  because,  a  word  more  restricted, 
more  circumscribed,  and  appropriated  in  its  acceptation  than 
either  of  its  companions ;  because,  moreover,  it  is  a  word  of 
specification,  and  not  so  general  and  undefined  as  matlieteuo  or 
didasko — "making  disciples"  and  "teaching  them."  It  indi- 
cates an  outward  and  formal  action  into  the  awful  name  of  the 
whole  Divinity ;  and  consequently,  ci  priori,  we  would  be  led  to 
regard  it  as  a  most  specific  and  well-defined  term.  The  action 
was  to  be  performed  by  one  person  upon  another  person,  and  in 
the  most  solemn  manner. 

Besides,  it  is  a  peculiar  and  positive  ordinance.  All  admit 
that  baptism  is  a  positive  ordinance  ;  and  that  positive  precepts, 
as  contradistinguished  from  moral  precepts,  indicate  the  special 
will  of  a  sovereign  in  some  exact  and  well-defined  action,  the 
nature,  form,  and  necessity  of  which  arise  not  from  our  own  ^ 
priori  reasonings  about  utility  or  expediency,  but  from  the 
clearly-expressed  will  of  the  lawgiver.  It  is  farther  universally 
agreed  that  circumcision  was  a  positive  and  not  a  moral  institu- 
tion, made  right  and  obligatory  by  the  mere  force  of  a  positive 
law.  It  enjoined  a  specific  act  upon  a  specific  subject,  called  for 
exact  obedience,  and  was  therefore  definitely  set  forth  by  a  spe- 
cific and  not  by  a  generic  term.  This  fact  will  not,  I  presume, 
be  disputed.  Baptism,  then,  like  circumcision,  must  have  the 
specific  action  to  be  performed,  implied,  and  expressed  in  it. 
That  baptism  is  such  a  term,  if  it  be  disputed,  the  sequel  will, 
we  presume,  abundantly  prove. 

Meantime,  before  hearing  the  witnesses  or  submitting  the  in- 
duction, it  may  not  be  uninteresting  to  pursue  this  analogy  a 
little  farther,  and  to  show,  d,  priori,  that  such  a  specific  precept 
or  term  is  to  be  expected. 


118  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

Will  it  not  be  conceded  by  all,  that  whatever  good  reason  can 
be  given  why,  not  a  general,  but  a  specific  word  was  chosen  by 
God,  in  commanding  circumcision  to  Abraham  and  his  posterity, 
demands  a  term  as  specific  and  intelligible  from  the  Christian 
Lawgiver  in  reference  to  the  institution  of  baptism  ?  Now,  as 
Jesus  Christ  must  have  intended  some  particular  action  to  be 
performed  by  his  ministers,  and  submitted  to  by  the  people,  in 
the  command  to  baptize  them,  it  follows  that  he  did  select  such 
a  word,  or  that  he  could  not  or  would  not  do  it.  This  is  a  tri- 
lemma  from  which  escape  is  not  easy.  If  any  one  say  he  could 
not,  then  either  the  language  which  he  spoke,  or  his  knowledge 
of  it  was  defective.  If  the  former,  then  the  language  was  unfit 
to  be  the  vehicle  of  a  divine  revelation  to  man ;  if  the  latter, 
his  divine  character  and  mission  are  directly  assailed  and  dis- 
honoured: or  if  any  one  say  he  could  have  done  it,  but  would 
not,  he  impeaches  either  his  sincerity  or  benevolence,  or  both  ; 
his  sincerity,  in  demanding  obedience  in  a  particular  case,  for 
which  he  cared  nothing ;  his  benevolence,  in  exacting  a  parti- 
cular service  in  an  ambiguous  and  unintelligible  term,  which 
should  perplex  and  confound  his  conscientious  friends  and  fol- 
lowers in  all  the  ages  of  the  world !  Follows  it  not,  then,  that 
he  could,  that  he  would,  find  such  a  word,  and  that  he  has  done 
it — and  that  baptizo  is  that  specific  word? 

Before  summoning  our  most  authoritative  witnesses  to  the 
meaning  of  this  important  word  baptizo,  I  shall  assert  a  few 
facts,  which,  I  presume,  will  not  be  denied  by  any  one  properly 
acquainted  with  the  original  language  of  the  New  Testament : — 

1.  Baptizo  is  not  a  radical,  but  a  derivative  word. 

2.  Its  root,  bapto,  is  never  applied  to  this  ordinance. 

3.  In  the  common  version,  bapto  is  translated,  both  in  its  sim- 
ple and  compound  form,  always  by  the  word  dij). 

4.  Baptizo  is  never  translated  by  dye,  stain,  or  colour. 

5.  Baptizo,  with  its  derivatives,  is  the  only  word  used  in  the 
New  Testament  to  indicate  this  ordinance.     And, 

6.  The  word  baptize  has  no  necessary  connection  with  water, 
or  any  liquid  whatever. 

Now,  from  these  indisputable  facts,  as  hereafter  to  be  de- 
veloped, some  important  corollaries  are  deduced ;  such  as — 

1st.  Baptizo  indicates  a  specific  action,  and,  consequently,  as 
such,  can  have  but  one  meaning.  For  if  a  person  or  thing  can 
be  immersed  in  water,  oil,  milk,  honey,  sand,  earth,  debt,  grief. 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  119 

affliction,  spirit,  light,  or  darkness,  &c.,  it  is  a  word  indicating 
specific  action,  and  specific  action  only. 

Baptizo,  confessedly  a  derivative  from  bapto,  derives  its  spe- 
cific meaning,  as  vrell  as  its  radical  and  immutable  form,  from 
that  word.  According  to  the  usage  of  all  languages,  ancient 
and  modern,  derivative  words  legally  inherit  the  specific,  though 
not  necessarily  the  figurative,  meaning  of  their  natural  progeni- 
tors ;  and  never  can  so  far  alienate  from  themselves  that  pecu- 
liar significance  as  to  indicate  any  action  specifically  difierent 
from  that  intimated  in  the  parent  stock.  Indeed,  all  the 
flexions  of  words,  with  their  sometimes  numerous  and  various 
families  of  descendants,  are  but  modifications  of  one  and  the 
same  generic  or  specific  idea. 

We  sometimes  say  that  words  generally  have  both  a  proper 
and  a  figurative  sense.  I  presume  we  may  go  farther,  and 
affirm  that  every  word  in  current  use  has  a  strictly  proper  and  a 
figurative  acceptation.  Now,  in  the  derivation  direct,  (for  there  is 
a  direct  and  there  is  an  indirect  derivation,)  the  proper  and  natural 
or  original  meaning  of  the  term  is  uniformly  transmitted.  Let 
us,  for  example,  take  the  Saxon  word  dip,  through  all  its  flexions 
and  derivatives.  Its  flexions  are  dip,  dips,  dippeth,  dipped,  dip- 
ping :  from  these  are  derived  but  a  few  words,  such  as  the  nouns 
dipping,  dipper,  dip-cliick,  dipping-needle.  Now,  in  all  the  flexions 
and  derivatives  of  this  word,  is  not  the  root  dip  always  found  in 
sense  as  well  as  in  form  ?  WJierever  the  radical  syllable  is  found 
the  radical  idea  is  in  it.  So  of  the  word  sprinkle:  its  flexions  are 
sprinkle,  sprinkleth,  sprinkling,  sprinkled;  and  its  derivatives 
are  the  nouns  sprinkling  and  sprinkler.  Does  not  the  idea  re- 
presented in  the  radical  word  sprinkle  descend  through  the 
whole  family  ?  We  shall  visit  a  larger  family.  From  the  verb 
read,  whose  flexions  are  reads,  readeth,  reading,  come  the  de- 
scendants reading,  (the  noun,)  readable,  readableness,  readably, 
reader,  readership.  The  radical  syllable  is  not  more  obvious 
than  the  uniformity  of  its  sense  throughout  the  whole  lineage. 
Let  us  now  advance  to  the  two  Greek  representatives  of  the 
verbs  dip  and  sprinkle.  These  are  ancient  families  and  much 
larger  than  any  of  the  modern.  Bapto,  the  root,  has  some  seven 
hundred  flexions,  besides  numerous  derivatives.  We  shall  only 
take  the  indicative  mood  through  one  tense  and  through  one 
person — hapto,  ebapton,  bapso,  ebapsa,  ebapJion,  baplio,  bebapha, 
ebebapTiein.    Its  derivatives  are  baptizo,  and  its  regular  flexions 


120  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

more  than  seven  hundred,  including  all  its  forms  of  mood,, tense, 
participle,  person,  number,  gender,  case;  from  which  spring 
baptistnos,  baptisma,  baptisis,  baptistees,  baptomai,  baptisomai, 
haptos,  baptisteerion,  bapha,  bapTiikos,  baplieis.  These,  through 
their  some  two  thousand  flexions  and  modifications,  retain  the 
hap  and  as  uniformly  the  dip  represented  by  it.  The  same  holds 
good  of  its  distant  neighbour  raino,  I  sprinkle.  It  has  many 
flexions  and  nearly  as  many  derivatives  as  bapto.  It  has  raino, 
rainomai,  rantizo,  rantismos,  ranfisma,  ranteer,  rantis,  rantos, 
with  their  some  two  thousand  flexions.  These  all  exhibit  the 
radical  syllable  rain  or  i^an,  and  with  it  the  radical  spHnTcle. 
Now,  as  it  is  philologically  impossible  to  find  bap  in  rain,  or 
rain  in  bap,  so  impossible  is  it  to  find  clip  in  sprinkle,  or  sprinkle 
in  dip.  Hence  the  utter  impossibility  of  either  of  these  words 
representing  both  actions.  It  is  dijficult  to  conceive  how  any 
man  of  letters  and  proper  reflection  can  for  a  moment  suppose 
that  bapto  can  ever  mean  sprinkle,  or  raino  dip. 

This  my  first  argument  is,  I  own,  a  work  of  supererogation, 
inasmuch  as  all  admit  that  baptizo,  and  not  bapto,  is  the  word 
that  the  Messiah  chose,  to  represent  the  action  he  intended, 
called  baptism  ;  and  all  the  learned  admit  that  its  primary,  pro- 
per, and  unfigurative  meaning  is  to  dip.  Hence,  if  all  that  I 
have  said  on  flexion  and  derivation  were  grammatically  false 
and  philologically  heterodox,  as  well  as  illogical,  my  cause  loses 
nothing.  I  feel  so  rich  in  resources  that  I  can  give  this  and 
many  such  arguments  for  nothing,  and  still  have  much  more 
than  a  competency  for  life.  But  be  it  all  strictly  and  philologi- 
cally true  and  solid,  as  I  unhesitatingly  ajffirm  it,  this  single  ar- 
gument establishes  my  first  proposition  without  farther  effort. 
For,  as  all  allow  that  dip  is  the  primary  and  proper  meaning  of 
bapto,  and  colour,  stain,  dye,  and  wet,  its  figurative  or  secondary 
meanings ;  and  as  all  admit  that  baptizo  is  the  word  that  the 
Christian  Lawgiver  consecrated  to  indicate  this  ordinance ;  and 
as  it  is  incontrovertibly  derived  from  bapto,  and  therefore  inhe- 
rits the  proper  meaning  of  the  bap,  which  is  dip,  then  is  it  not 
irresistibly  evident  that  baptizo  can  never  authorize  or  sanction 
any  other  action  than  dipping  or  immersion,  as  found  in  Christ's 
commission !  Such  is  my  first  argument,  which,  if  false,  I  lose 
nothing ;  which,  if  true,  my  proposition  is  already  established. 

But  we  must  have  arguments  and  illustrations  for  the  un- 
learned as  well  as  for  the  learned.    Before  we  advance  to  our 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  121 

second  argument,  founded  on  haptizo  itself,  I  shall,  in  three 
English  words,  selected  at  random,  show  that  neither  num- 
ber nor  variety  of  derivatives  from  a  common  stock,  can  ever 
nullify  the  original  idea  or  action  suggested.  I  take  a  verb, 
a  noun,  and  a  preposition,  with  their  whole  families.  I  open  at 
the  verb  adduce — duce  from  duco,  I  lead,  is  the  root.  The  family 
lineage  is  abduce,  adduce,  conduce,  deduce,  educe,  induce,  in- 
troduce, obduce,  produce,  reduce,  seduce,  traduce,  circumduc- 
tion, deduction,  induction.  Next  comes  the  noun  guard,  from 
which  the  verb  guard,  guarding,  guarded,  guarder,  guardedly, 
guardedness,  guardship,  guardable,  guardful,  guardage,  guard- 
ance,  guardiant,  guardian,  guardianess,  guardianship,  guardian- 
age,  guardless.  And  finally  we  open  at  the  preposition  up, 
whence  spring  upon,  upper,  uppermost,  upperest,  upward.  Now, 
can  any  one  for  a  moment  doubt  that  in  these  three  examples, 
the  radical  syllables  duce,  guard,  and  up,  retain  the  same  sense, 
whatever  it  may  be,  generic  or  specific,  through  every  branch 
of  their  respective  families. 

Ancient  Greek  grammarians  sometimes  arranged  their  verbs 
in  the  form  of  trees,  making  the  origin  of  the  family  the  root ; 
the  next  of  importance,  the  trunk ;  the  next,  the  larger  branches ; 
and  so  on  to  the  topmost  twig.  In  this  way  both  flexion  and 
derivation  were  occasionally  exhibited.  This  fact  I  state  be- 
cause it  suggests  to  me  a  new  form  of  presenting  this,  my  first 
argument,  to  the  apprehension  of  all  my  readers.  A  great  ma- 
jority of  our  citizens  are  better  read  in  forests,  fields,  and  gar- 
dens, than  in  the  schools  of  philology  or  ancient  languages. 
Agriculturists,  horticulturists,  botanists  will  fully  comprehend 
me  when  I  say,  in  all  the  dominions  of  vegetable  nature  un- 
touched by  human  art,  as  is  the  root  so  is  the  stem,  and  so  are 
all  the  branches.  If  the  root  be  oak,  the  stem  cannot  be  ash, 
nor  the  branches  cedar.  What  would  you  think,  courteous 
reader,  of  the  sanity  or  veracity  of  the  backwoodsman,  who 
would  affirm  that  he  found  in  a  state  of  nature  a  tree  whose 
root  was  oak,  whose  stem  was  cherry,  whose  boughs  were  pear, 
and  whose  leaves  were  chestnut.  If  these  grammarians  or  phi- 
lologists have  been  happy  in  their  analogies  drawn  from  the 
root  and  branches  of  trees,  to  illustrate  the  derivation  of  words, 
how  singularly  fantastic  the  genius  that  creates  a  philological 
tree  whose  root  is  hapto,  whose  stem  is  cTieo,  whose  branches 
are  rantizo,  whose  fruit  is  IcatTiarizo;  or,  if  not  too  ludicrous, 

11 


122  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

and  preposterous  for  English  ears,  whose  root  is  dip,  whoso 
trunk  is  pour,  whose  branches  are  sprinkle,  and  whose  fruit  is 
purijicaiion! 

My  first  argument,  then,  is  founded  on  the  root  hapto,  whose 
proper  signification  all  learned  men  say  is  dip,  and  whose  main 
derivative  is  bapiizo — which,  by  all  the  laws  of  philology  and 
all  the  analogies  of  nature,  never  can,  never  did,  and  never  will 
signify  either  to  pour  or  sprinkle. 


CHAPTER  II. 

BAPTIZO. 


Argument  2. — Oreeh  lexicographers,  totth  one  consent,  in  their  definitions, 
as  well  as  Greek  philosophers,  historians,  orators,  and  poets,  in  their  use 
of  this  term  baptizo,  render  it  dip,  plunge,  immerse  :  never  as  indicat- 
ing sprinkling,  pouring,  or  scattering  any  thing. 

I  NOW  proceed  to  bapiizo  itself,  the  word  foreordained  by  the 
Messiah  to  indicate  his  will  in  this  sacred  ordinance. 

Meanwhile,  we  have  not  forgotten  that  the  meaning  of  baptizo^ 
as  well  as  bapto,  is  a  question  of  fact,  to  be  decided  by  impartial 
and  disinterested  witnesses,  whose  testimony  is  to  be  fairly 
stated,  candidly  heard,  and  impartially  weighed,  before  the  case 
is  finally  adjudicated. 

My  witnesses  are  so  numerous  that  I  must  call  them  forth  in 
classes,  and  then  hear  them  in  detail.  I  shall  first  summon  the 
Greek  lexicographers,  the  most  learned  and  most  competent 
witnesses  in  this  case,  in  the  world.  These  gentlemen  are,  and 
of  right  ought  to  be,  inductive  philosophers.  Philology  is  the 
most  inductive  of  all  sciences.  The  meaning  of  a  word  is  ascer- 
tained by  the  usage  of  those  writers  and  speakers  whose  know- 
ledge and  acquirements  have  made  them  masters  of  their  own 
language.  From  this  class  of  vouchers  we  have  derived  most 
of  our  knowledge  of  holy  writ,  and  of  all  that  remains  of  Gre- 
cian literature  and  science.  We,  indeed,  try  the  dictionaries 
themselves  by  the  classics,  the  extant  authors  of  the  language. 
We  prove  or  disprove  them  by  the  same  inductive  operation  by 
which  wo  ascertain  the  facts  of  any  science,  mental  or  phy- 
sical. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  123 

I  will  rely  exclusively  upon  the  most  ancient,  the  most  impart 
tial,  and  the  most  famous  lexicographers.  I  therefore  prefer 
those  on  my  respondent's  side  of  the  question  to  those  on  my 
own,  and  I  prefer  them  who  lived  and  published  before  the  con- 
troversy became  so  rife  as  it  has  been  during  the  present  cen- 
tury. 

1.  We  shall  first  hear  the  venerable  Scapula,  a  foreign  lexi- 
cographer, of  1579.  On  hapto,  the  root,  what  does  this  most 
learned  lexicographer  depose  ?  Hear  him :  ''Bapto — mergo,  im- 
mergo,  item  tingo  (quod  sit  immergendo)."  To  translate  his 
Latin — To  dip,  to  immerse ;  also,  to  dye,  because  that  may  he 
done  by  immersing.  Of  the  passive  bapiomai  he  says,  "  Mergor, 
item  lavor — to  be  immersed,  to  be  washed."  Of  Baptizo — 
"  Mergo  seu  immergo,  item  submergo,  item  abluo,  lavo — To  dip, 
to  immerse ;  also,  to  submerge  or  overwhelm,  to  wash,  to  cleanse." 

2.  Next  comes  the  more  ancient  Henricus  Stephanus,  of  1572. 
Bapto  and  baptizo — "  Mergo  seu  immergo  ut  quae  tingendi  aut 
abluendi  gratia  aqua  immergimus — To  dip  or  immerge,  as  we 
dip  things  for  the  purpose  of  dyeing  them,  or  immerge  them  in 
water."  He  gives  the  proper  and  figurative  meanings  as  Scapula 
gives  them. 

3.  We  shall  next  hear  the  Thesaurics  of  Kobertson.  My  edi- 
tion was  printed  at  Cambridge,  1676.  It  is  the  most  compre- 
hensive dictionary  I  have  ever  seen.  It  contains  80,000  words 
more  than  the  old  Schrevelius.  It  is,  indeed,  sometimes  titled 
Cornelii  Schrevelii  Lexicon  Manuale  Graeco-Latinum  Copiosissime 
Adauctum.  His  definitions  are  generally  regarded  as  the  most 
precise  and  accurate.  He  defines  baptizo  by  only  two  words — 
mergo  and  lavo — one  proper  and  one  figurative  meaning — ^to  im- 
merse, to  wash. 

4.  Schleusner,  a  name  revered  by  orthodox  theologians,  and 
of  enviable  fame,  says,  (Glasgow  ed.  1822,) — *'  1st.  Proprie,  im- 
mergo ac  intingo,  in  aquam  immergo.  Properly  it  signifies,  I 
immerse,  I  dip,  I  immerse  in  water.  2d.  It  signifies,  I  wash  or 
cleanse  by  water — (quia  haud  raro  aliquid  immergi  ac  intingi 
in  aquam  solet  ut  lavetur) — because,  for  the  most  part,  a  thing 
must  be  dipped  or  plunged  into  water  that  it  may  be  washed." 
Thus  he  gives  the  reason  why  baptizo  figuratively  means  to  wash, 
because  that  it  is  frequently  the  efiect  of  immersion. 

5.  After  Schleusner,  we  shall  hear  the  distinguished  Pasor. 
My  copy  is  the  London  edition  of  1050.     "  Bapto  et  baptizo — 


124  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

Mergo,  immergo,  tingo — quod  sit  immergendo,  differt  a  dimai 
quod  est  profundum  petere  et  penitus  submergi." 

Again  he  adds — "  Comparantur  afflictiones  gurgitibus  aqua- 
rum  quibus  veluti  merguntur  qui  miseriis  et  calamitatibus  hujus 
vitae  conflictantur,  ita  tamen  merguntur  ut  rursus  emergant." 
All  of  which  we  translate  as  follows  : — "  To  dip,  to  immerse,  to 
dye,  because  it  is  done  by  immersing.  It  differs  from  dunai, 
which  means  to  sink  to  the  bottom  and  to  be  thoroughly  sub- 
merged." 

Metaphorically,  in  Matthew,  afflictions  are  compared  to  a  flood 
of  waters  in  which  they  seem  to  be  immersed  who  are  over- 
whelmed with  the  miseries  and  misfortunes  of  life  ;  yet  only  so 
overwhelmed  as  to  emerge  again. 

6.  After  these  venerable  continental  authorities  we  shall  now 
introduce  a  few  English  lexicographers,  both  general  and  spe- 
cial. Parkhurst's  Lexicon  for  the  New  Testament  deposes  that 
laptizo,  first  and  primarily,  means  to  dip,  immerse,  or  plunge  in 
water ;  but  in  the  New  Testament  it  occurs  not  strictly  in  this 
sense,  unless  so  far  as  this  is  included  in  "to  wash  one's  self, 
be  washed,  wash  the  hands  by  immersion  or  dipping  in  water." 
Mark  vii.  4,  Luke  xi.  38.  To  immerse  in  water  or  with  water, 
in  token  of  purification  from  sin  and  from  spiritual  pollution  ; 
figuratively,  "  to  be  immersed  or  plunged  into  a  flood  or  sea,  as 
it  were,  of  grievous  afflictions  and  sufferings."  So  the  Septua- 
gint  and  Josephus  use  it — Tie  anomai  me  haptizei — Iniquity 
plunges  me  into  terror. 

7.  Next  comes  Mr.  Donnegan,  distinguished  and  popular  in 
England  and  America.  ''Bapiizo — to  immerse  repeatedly  into 
a  liquid,  to  submerge,  to  sink  thoroughly,  to  saturate — metony- 
mically,  to  drench  with  wine,  to  dip  in  a  vessel  and  draw.  Bap- 
iismos — Immersion,  submersion,  the  act  of  washing  or  bathing. 
Baptistees,  (a  baptist,)  one  who  immerses,  submerges.  Baptis- 
ma,  an  object  immersed,  submerged,  washed,  or  soaked." 

8.  Rev.  Dr.  John  Jones,  of  England,  deserves  the  next  place, 
at  least  in  rank.  Bapto  he  defines,  "  I  dip,  I  stain ;"  and  hap- 
tizo,  "  I  plunge,  I  plunge  in  water,  dip,  baptize,  bury,  over- 
whelm." 

9.  Greenfield,  editor  of  the  Comprehensive  Bible,  the  Polu- 
micrian  New  Testament,  &c.,  &c.,  whose  reputation  as  a  New 
Testament  lexicographer  is  well  known,  says — ^^  Baptizo  means 
to  immerse,  immcrge,  submerge,  sink."    /.  N.  T,  "  To  wash, 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  125 

perform  ablution,  cleanse,  to  immerse,  baptize,  and  perform  the 
rite  of  baptism." 

10.  Two  Germans  of  distinction  may  be  next  heard.  Pro- 
fessor Host,  whose  reputation  is  equal  to  that  of  any  other  Ger- 
man linguist,  in  his  standard  German  Greek  Lexicon,  simply 
defines  l>a;pto  by  words  indicating  to  plunge,  to  immerse,  to  sub- 
merge. 

11.  Bretshchneider,  said  to  be  the  most  critical  lexicographer 
of  the  New  Testament,  aflSrms  that  "  an  entire  immersion  be- 
longs to  the  nature  of  baptism.  This  is  the  meaning  of  the 
word :  for  in  haptizo  is  contained  the  idea  of  a  complete  immer- 
sion under  water,  at  least  so  is  haptisma  in  the  New  Testament." 

12.  Bass,  an  English  lexicographer,  for  the  New  Testament, 
gives  haptizo  "  to  dip,  immerse,  plunge  in  water  ;  to  bathe  one^s 
self;  to  be  immersed  in  sufierings  or  afflictions." 

If  Pickering  could  be  regarded  as  a  new  or  distinct  lexico- 
grapher, we  should  add  his  testimony,  as  it  is  corroborative  of 
the  above.  He  gives  haptisma  "  immersion,  dipping,  plunging ; 
metaphorically,  misery  or  calamity  with  which  one  is  over- 
whelmed." 

13.  I  shall  conclude  this  distinguished  class  of  witnesses  from 
the  high  school  of  lexicography  with  the  testimony  of  Stokius, 
who  has  furnished  us  with  a  Greek  and  Hebrew  clavis — one  for 
the  Hebrew  and  one  for  the  Greek  Scriptures.  My  edition  is 
the  Leipsic,  of  1752.  This  great  master  of  sacred  literature 
says,  "  Generatim  ac  vi  vocis  intinctionis  ac  immersionis  baptizo 
notionem  obtinet.  Speciatim  proprie  est  immergere  ac  intingere 
in  aquam ;"  which  we  translate,  ''Baptizo  generally,  and  by  the 
force  of  the  word,  indicates  the  idea  of  simply  dipping  and  dye- 
ing ;  but  properly  it  means  to  dip  or  immerse  in  water."  He 
defines  haptisma  in  a  like  manner — *'  It  generally  denotes  im- 
mersion and  dyeing ;  but  by  the  innate  force  of  the  term,  it  pro- 
perly imports  immersion  or  dipping  of  a  thing  in  water,  that  it 
may  be  washed  or  cleansed."  And  mark  especially  the  follow- 
ing frank  declaration  of  this  distinguished  theologian  and 
critic  : — "  The  word  is  transferred  to  denote  the  first  sacrament 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  they  call  the  Sacrament  of  Initia- 
tion— viz.  baptism.  In  which  sacrament  those  to  be  baptized 
were  anciently  immersed  in  water,  as  now-a-days  they  are  only 

sprinkled  with  water,  that  they  may  be  washed  from  the  poUu- 

11* 


126  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

tion  of  sId,  obtain  the  remission  of  it,  and  be  received  into  tlie 

covenant  of  grace  as  heirs  of  eternal  life." 

So  depose  these  thirteen  great  masters  on  the  native,  original, 
and  proper  meaning  of  the  word  in  debate  :  to  whose  testimony 
I  might  add  several  others,  were  it  not  that  they  are  but  a  mo- 
notonous repetition  of  those  already  presented. 

But  to  sum  up  this  class  of  evidence,  and  to  show  from  the 
highest  source  of  American  theological  authority  that  I  have 
neither  misquoted  nor  misinterpreted  the  verdict  of  this  illustri- 
ous jury  of  thirteen  unchallenged  judges,  I  will  quote  the  words 
of  Professor.  Stuart,  of  the  Andover  Theological  School: — - 
**  Bapio,  Baptizo  mean  to  dip,  plunge,  or  immerge  into  any 
liquid.  All  lexicographers  and  critics  or  ant  note  are 
AGREED  IN  THis.'^^^  Hc  is  my  American  apostle,  standing  to 
this  argument  as  Paul  stood  in  comparison  with  the  original 
twelve — himself  the  one  only  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  though 
the  thirteenth  as  respected  the  original  twelve  selected  of  and 
for  the  Jews. 

Before  dismissing  this  class  of  witnesses,  it  is  pertinent  to  my 
proposition  that  I  state  distinctly  three  facts : — 

1.  These  lexicographers  were  not  Baptists,  but  Pedobaptists. 

2.  Not  one  of  them  ever  translated  any  of  these  terms  by  the 
word  sprinkle. 

3.  Not  any  one  of  them  ever  translated  any  of  these  terms  by 
the  word  j)our.  Consequently,  with  all  their  prejudices,  they 
could  find  no  authority  for  so  doing,  else  doubtless  they  would 
have  done  it. 

My  readers  will,  I  hope,  pardon  the  introduction  of  so  many 
Greek  and  Latin  words.  The  occasion  demands  it.  From  the 
course  pursued  by  our  neighbouring  denominations,  wo  arc  com- 
pelled to  lay  the  corner-stone  of  our  superstructure  not  only  deep 
in  the  earth,  but  upon  a  solid  Greek  basis.  The  foundation  be- 
ing laid  on  a  Grecian  rock,  and  the  wall  above-ground,  our  la- 
bours will,  we  hope,  be  more  intelligible,  and  consequently  more 
agreeable  and  more  interesting  to  us  all. 

We  have,  then,  the  unanimous  testimony  of  all  the  distin- 
guished lexicographers  known  in  Europe  and  America,  that  the 
proper  and  everywhere  current  signification  of  haptizo,  the  word 
chosen  by  Jesus  Christ  in  his  commission  to  the  Apostles,  is  to 

*  Biblical  lU-pository  for  1833,  page  2'J8. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  127 

dip,  plunge,  or  Immerse ;  and  that  any  other  meaning  is  tropi- 
cal, rhetorical,  or  fanciful.  This  being  so,  then  our  first  propo- 
sition must  be  undoubtedly  true.  But  besides  these,  I  have 
various  other  classes  of  witnesses  to  adduce  in  solemn  confirma- 
tion of  the  testimony  of  this  most  learned,  veritable,  and  vene- 
rable class  of  men. 

But  it  will  be  asked,  "  On  what  authority  are  dictionaries  to 
be  received  V  It  will  be  answered.  On  the  sufirage  of  the 
learned.  Again,  "  On  what  principle  are  the  sufirages  of  the 
learned  obtained  V  It  is  responded.  On  their  own  knowledge  of 
the  agreement  of  the  definitions  with  the  usage  of  the  standard 
writers  of  the  language.  Then  we  are  thrown  at  once  upon  the 
common  use  of  those  writers  who  are  regarded  as  competent 
judges  of  their  own  language  at  the  times  in  which  they  lived. 
By  an  examination  of  these,  we  come  inductively  to  a  proper 
understanding  of  any  particular  word. 

Happily  for  us,  this  work  has  been,  in  a  good  measure,  done 
abeady,  at  least  much  of  it  has  been  done  by  Dr.  Gale,  of  Eng- 
land ;  Dr.  Alexander  Carson,  of  Ireland ;  Professor  Stuart,  of 
Andover,  and  others  who  preceded  them ;  and  even  some  of  us 
have  done  a  little  at  it,  and  can  do  some  more.  No  word,  in- 
deed, in  the  Greek  language  has  already  been  more  rigidly  can- 
vassed and  more  accurately  traced  than  baptizo,  and  none  more 
satisfactorily  established.  I  can  only  give  a  specimen  of  the 
classic,  literal,  and  figurative  usus  loquendi  in  the  case  of  baptizo 
and  its  root  bapto : — 

1st.  Of  the  proper  meaning  of  baptizo : — 

"Lucian,  in  Timon,  the  man-hater,  makes  him  say — *If  I 
should  see  any  one  floating  toward  me  upon  the  rapid  torrent, 
and  he  should,  with  outstretched  hands,  beseech  me  to  assist 
him,  I  would  thrust  him  from  me,  baptizing  {baptizonta)  him,- 
until  he  would  rise  no  more.' " 

"  Plutarch,  vol.  x.  p.  18.  *  Then  plunging  [baptizon]  himself 
into  the  lake  Copais.' " 

*'  Strabo,  lib.  6,  speaking  of  a  lake  near  Agrigentum,  says — 
'Things  that  elsewhere  cannot  float,  do  not  sink  [baptizesthai).' 
In  lib.  12,  of  a  certain  river  he  says — '  If  one  shoots  an  arrow 
into  it,  the  force  of  the  water  resists  it  so  much,  that  it  will 
scarcely  sink  [baptizesthai).'" 

"  Polybius,  vol.  iii.  p.  311.  ult.,  applies  the  word  to  soldiers  pas- 
sing through  water,  immersed  [baptizomenoi)  up  to  the  breast." 

"  The  sinner  is  represented  by  Porphyry,  p.  282,  as  baptized 


128  ACTION  OE  BAPTISM. 

{haptizetai)  up  to  his  head  in  Styx,  a  celebrated  river  in  hell.    Is 
there  any  question  about  the  mode  of  this  baptism  V 

*'  Themistius,  Orat.  iv.  p.  133,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Gale,  says — 
*  The  pilot  cannot  tell  but  he  may  save  one  in  the  voyage  that 
had  better  be  drowned  {haptisai),  sunk  into  the  sea.'" 

"  The  Sibylline  verse  concerning  the  city  of  Athens,  quoted 
by  Plutarch  in  his  life  of  Theseus,  most  exactly  determines  the 
meaning  of  haptizo.     Askos  baptizee  dimai  de  toi  ou  iliemis  esti." 

*'  Thou  may  est  be  dipped,  0  bladder !  but  thou  art  not  fated 
to  sink." 

•'  For  our  ship,"  says  Josephus,  "  having  been  baptized  or  im- 
mersed in  the  nridst  of  the  Adriatic  sea." 

"  Speaking  of  the  murder  of  Aristobulus,  by  command  of 
Herod,  he  says,  *  The  boy  was  sent  to  Jericho  by  night,  and 
there  hj  command  having  been  immersed  {baptizomenos)  in  a 
pond  by  the  Galatians,  he  perished.'  The  same  transaction  is 
related  in  the  Antiquities  in  these  words :  *  Pressing  him  down 
always,  as  he  was  swimming,  and  haptizing  him  as  in  sport^ 
they  did  not  give  over  until  they  entirely  drowned  him.' " 

"  Homer,  Od.  i.  392 :  As  when  a  smith  dips  or  j)lunges  {haptei) 
a  hatchet  or  huge  poleaxe  into  cold  water,  viz.  to  harden  them." 

**  Pindar,  Pyth.  ii.  139,  describes  the  impotent  malice  of  his 
enemies,  by  representing  himself  to  be  like  the  cork  upon  a  net 
in  the  sea,  which  does  not  sink :  As  when  a  net  is  cast  into  the 
sea,  the  cork  swims  above,  so  am  I  unplunged  [ahaplistos) ;  on 
which  the  Greek  scholiast,  in  commenting,  says :  '  As  the  cork 
cu  dunei,  does  not  sink,  so  I  am  abaptistos,  unplunged,  not  im- 
mersed. The  cork  remains  abaptistos,  and  swims  on  the  surface 
of  the  sea,  being  of  a  nature  which  is  abaptistos ;  in  like  man- 
ner I  am  abaptistos.'  In  the  beginning  of  this  explanation,  the 
scholiast  says :  *  Like  a  cork  of  the  net  in  the  sea,  ou  baptisomai, 
I  am  not  plnnged  or  sunk.'  The  frequent  repetition  of  the  same 
words  and  sentiment,  in  this  scholium,  shows,  in  all  probability, 
that  it  is  compiled  from  different  annotators  upon  the  text.  But 
the  sense  of  baptizo  in  all  is  too  clear  to  admit  of  any  doubt." 

"  Aristotle,  de  Color,  c.  4,  says :  By  reason  of  heat  and  moist- 
ure, the  colours  enter  into  the  pores  of  things  dijqyed  into  them, 
{ton  bapjtomenou.)  Do  Anima,  iii.  c.  12:  If  a  man  dips  {bapsei) 
any  thing  into  wax,  it  is  moved  so  far  as  it  is  dipped.  Hist. 
Animal,  viii.  c.  2,  speaking  of  certain  fish,  he  says :  They  cannot 
endure  great  changes,  such  as  that,  in  the  summer  time,  tJieg 
should  jdunge  [baptosi]  into  cold  water.  l))id.  c.  29,  he  speaks  of 
giving  diseased  elephants  water  to  drink,  and  dipping  [baptontes) 
hay  into  honey  for  them." 

"  Aristophanes,  in  his  comedy  of  The  Clouds,  act  i.  scene  2, 
represents  Socrates  as  gravely  computing  how  many  times  the 
distance  between  two  of  its  legs  a  Ilea  could  spring  at  one  leap ; 
and  in  order  to  ascertain  this,  the  philosopher  first  molted  a 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  129 

piece  of  wax,  and  then  taking  the  flea,  he  dipped  or  plunged 
(enebaphes)  two  of  its  feet  into  it,^^  &c. 

"  Heraclides  Ponticus,  a  disciple  of  Aristotle,  AUegor.  p.  495, 
Bays :  When  a  piece  of  iron  is  taken  red  hot  from  the  fire,  and 
plunged  in  the  water  {udati  bapiizetai),  the  heat,  being  quenched 
by  the  peculiar  nature  of  the  water,  ceases." 

"  Herodotus,  in  Euterpe,  speaking  of  an  Egyptian  who  hap- 
pens to  touch  a  swine,  says :  Going  to  the  river  [Nile]  he  dips 
himself  {ebaphe  eauton)  with  his  clothes." 

**  Aratus,  in  his  Phaenom.  v.  650,  speaks  of  the  constellation 
Cepheus,  as  dipping  {baptoon)  his  head  or  upper  part  into  the 
sea.  In  v.  858,  he  says :  If  the  sun  dip  {baptoi)  himself  cloud- 
less into  the  western  flood.  Again,  in  v.  951.  If  the  crow  has 
dipped  [ebapsato)  his  head  into  the  river,"  &c. 

"Xenophon,  Anab.  ii.  2,  4,  describes  the  Greeks  and  their 
enemies  as  sacrificing  a  goat,  a  bull,  a  wolf,  and  a  r&m,  and 
dipping  [baptontes)  into  a  shield  [filled  with  their  blood],  the 
Greeks  the  sword,  the  Barbarians  a  spear,  in  order  to  make  a 
treaty  that  could  not  be  broken." 

"Plutarch,  Parall.  Graec.  Rom.  p.  545 :  speaking  of  the  strata- 
gem of  a  Roman  general,  in  order  to  insure  victory,  he  says : 
He  set  up  a  trophy,  on  which,  dipping  his  hand  into  blood  {eis 
to  aima — baptizas),  he  wrote  this  inscription,  &c.  In  vol.  vi.  p. 
680  (edit.  Reiske),  he  speaks  of  iron  plunged  [bapiomenon),  viz. 
into  water,  in  order  to  harden  it.  Ibid.  p.  QZS^ plunge  {bapiison) 
yourself  into  the  sea." 

"  Diodorus  Siculus,  edit.  Heyne,  iv.  p.  118 :  Whose  ship  being 
sunk  or  merged  [baptistheises).  Some  other  editions  read  baptis- 
theises,  plunged  into  the  deep,  which  is  a  good  gloss." 

"  Plato,  De  Repub.  iv.  p.  637,  represents  dyers,  who  wish  to 
make  a  permanent  colour,  as  first  choosing  out  wool,  sorting  and 
working  it  over,  and  then  {baptousi)  they  plunge  it,  viz.  into  the 
dyestufi"." 

"  Epictetus,  iii.  p.  69.  ed.  Schwiegh.,  in  a  fragment  of  his  work 
says :  As  you  would  not  wish,  sailing  in  a  large  ship  adorned  and 
abounding  with  gold,  to  be  sunk  or  immerged  [baptizesthai) ,  so,"&c. 

"  Hippocrates,  p.  532,  edit.  Basil :  Shall  I  not  laugh  at  the 
man  who  si^iks  {baptisonta)  his  ship  by  overloading  it,  and  then 
complains  of  the  sea  for  ingulfing  it  with  its  cargo  ?  On  page 
50,  to  dip  {baptein)  the  probes  in  some  emollient.  Page  51,  dip- 
ping {bapsasa)  the  rag  in  ointment,  &c.  Page  104,  cakes  dipped 
{embaptomenoi)  into  sour  wine.  Page  145,  dipping  {baptoon) 
sponges  in  warm  water.  And  in  the  same  way  in  all  parts  of 
his  book,  in  instances  almost  without  number." 

"  Heraclides,  Allegor.,  says.  When  a  piece  of  iron  is  taken  red- 
hot  from  the  fire  and  plunged  [bapiizetai)  into  water." 

"  Heliodorus,  vi.  4.  When  midnight  had  plunged  [ebaptizon) 
the  city  in  sleep." 


130  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

FIGURATIVE   USE. 

"Plutarch.     OverwJielmed  with  debts  [hebaptismenon)'' 

"  Chrjsostom.  Overwhelmed  {baptizomenos)  with  innumerable 
cares." 

"  Lucian,  iii.  page  81.  He  is  like  one  dizzy  and  baptized  or 
sunk  [bebaptismeno) — viz.  into  insensibility  by  drinking." 

"Justin  Martyr.     OverwJielmed  with  sins  [bebaptismenos)J* 

"  Aristotle,  de  Mirabil.  Ausc,  speaks  of  a  saying  among  the 
Phenicians,  that  there  were  certain  places  beyond  the  pillars  of 
Hercules,  which  when  it  is  ebb-tide,  are  not  overjioioed  (me  baptv- 
zesthai),  but  at  full-tide  are  overflowed  (katakluzestliai) ;  which 
word  is  here  used  as  an  equivalent  for  baptizesthai," 

"  Plato,  Conviv.  p.  176.  I  myself  am  one  of  those  who  were 
drenched  or  overwhelmed  {bebaptismenon)  yesterday,  viz.  with 
wine.  In  another  place :  Having  overwhelmed  {baptisasa)  Alex- 
ander with  much  wine.  Euthydem.  p.  267,  ed.  Heindorf.  A 
youth  overwhelmed  [baptizomenon),  viz.  with  questions." 

"  Philo  Judaeus,  vol.  ii.  p.  478.  I  know  some,  who,  when 
they  easily  become  intoxicated,  before  they  are  entirely  over- 
whelmed [printeleos  baptistlienai) ,  viz.  with  wine." 

"  Diodorus  Siculus,  tom.  i.  p.  107.  Most  of  the  land  animals 
that  are  intercepted  by  the  river  [Nile]  perish,  being  over- 
whelmed  [baptizomena)  ;  here  used  in  the  literal  sense.  Tom.  i. 
p.  191 :  The  river,  borne  along  by  a  more  violent  current,  over- 
whelmed [ebaptise)  many;  the  literal  signification.  Tom.  i.  p. 
129.  And  because  they  [the  nobles]  have  a  supply  by  these 
means  [presents],  they  do  not  overwhelm  their  subjects  with 
taxes." 

Many  instances  are  given  by  Stuart,  Carson,  and  others,  in 
which  bapto  signifies  to  'dye.  It  is,  indeed,  useless  to  array  these, 
inasmuch  as  there  is  now  no  longer  dispute  on  that  subject. 
Since  Messrs.  Carson  and  Stuart's  essays  on  this  subject,  it  is 
agreed  among  the  learned  of  all  parties  that  bapto  and  baptizo 
do  difier  only  in  one  point,  not  formerly  observed  by  the  lexi- 
cographers themselves ;  and  that  point  is,  that  Bapto  is  never 

USED  TO  DENOTE  THE  ORDINANCE  OF  BaPTISM,  AND  BaPTIZO  NEVER 

SIGNIFIES  TO  DYE.  In  thc  radical  and  proper  import,  it  is  abun- 
dantly evident  that  they  are  isodunai,  exactly  the  same  as  to 
signification. 

But  it  has  been  urged  that  bapto  and  baptizo  have  a  classic 
and  a  sacred  use — that  they  moan  one  thing  in  common  classic 
Greek,  and  another  in  the  Septuagint  Old  Testament,  in  the 
apochryphal  books,  and  in  the  apostolic  writings — that  the  synor 
goguc  and  classic  use  is  dificrcnt. 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  131 

As  truly  might  they  affirm  that  matTieteuo  and  didasko,  the 
other  terms  in  the  commission,  have  two  meanings — one  for  the 
Bible,  and  another  for  all  other  books ;  and  thus  take  from  us  at 
once  the  key  of  interpretation.  I  cheerfully  admit  the  provin- 
cial and  idiomatic  acceptation  of  terms,  and  that  sometimes 
words  have  some  shades  of  meaning  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
Scriptures  which  are  not  common  in  other  books :  still,  this  ad- 
mission has  much  more  to  do  with  phrases  and  particular  modes 
of  expression  than  with  the  exact  meaning  of  words.  "When 
any  man  in  debate  assumes  that  a  word  means  sprinkle  in  the 
Bible  and  dip  in  all  other  books,  or  that  any  term  is  specifi- 
cally different  in  its  acceptance  there  from  its  current  use  else- 
where, I  demand  the  proof :  clear,  ample,  and  satisfactory  proof. 
But,  while  that  is  withheld,  I  must  withhold  confidence  in  his 
judgment  and  respect  for  him  as  a  scholar.  But  no  one  has 
yet  shown  that  haptizo,  or  its  root  bapto,  has  any  other  specific 
meaning  in  the  Bible  than  in  other  writings. 

I  demand  an  induction  of  all  the  occurrences  of  these  words 
in  Holy  AYrit  from  the  person  who  assumes  that  ground ;  and 
also  an  effort  from  him  to  affix  to  them  in  any  of  these  occur- 
rences a  meaning  necessarily  different  from  their  current  use. 
This,  I  presume,  can  never  be  done ;  and,  therefore,  by  a  real 
scholar,  will  never  be  attempted. 

Baptizo  is  found  but  twice  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  first 
of  these,  says  Mr.  Stuart,  means  to  immerse,  dip,  or  plunge. 
1  Kings  V.  14:  "Naaman  plunged  himself  seven  times  into  the 
Jordan.'"  This  was  the  way  that  he  obeyed  the  precept,  "  Go 
wash  {lousai)  thyself  seven  times  in  the  Jordan." 

The  second  means  figuratively  to  overwhelm.  "  My  iniquity 
overwhelms  me,"  (me  baptizei.)  Isa.  xxi.  4.  No  exception  as 
yet. 

It  is  found  but  twice  in  the  apochryphal  books  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. Of  Judith,  chap.  xii.  5,  it  is  said,  "she  went  out  by 
night  and  washed  [ebaptizeto)  herself  in  the  camp  at  the  fountain 
of  water."  In  Sirach,  xxxi.  25,  there  occurs  the  expression 
baptizo  menos  apo  nekroon.  He  who  is  cleansed  from  a 'dead 
carcase  and  toucheth  it  again,  what  doth  he  profit  by  his  wash- 
ing ?  too  loutree  autou.  According  to  the  law.  Numbers  xix.  19, 
the  unclean  was  never  cleansed  until  he  bathed  himself  in, 
water.  These  instances,  therefore,  constitute  no  exception  from 
the  established  meaning  of  the  word  in  classic  and  common  use. 


132  ACnON  OP  BAPTISM. 

Professor  Stuart  gives  all  the  places  where  hapto  is  found  in 
the  Septuagint.  Bapto  is  found  in  Lev.  iv.  6  ;  ix. ;  xiv.  6 ;  xiv. 
61 ;  xi.  32,  translated  dip  and  plunge.  In  Num.  xix.  18  ;  Deut. 
xxxiii.  24 ;  Josh.  iii.  15  ;  Ruth  ii.  14 ;  1  Sam.  iv.  27  ;  2  Kings 
viii.  15;  Job  ix.  31;  Ps.  Ixviii.  23.  In  these  passages  it  i^,  with 
the  exception  of  once  plunge,  always  dip;  and  amongst  the 
plunged  and  dipped  are  vessels,  mattrasses,  and  persons. 

Bapto  is  used  to  indicate  *'to  smear  or  moisten  by  dipping," 
says  Professor  Stuart,  three  times :  Lev.  iv.  47 ;  xiv.  16 ;  Ex. 
xii.  22.  It  once  signifies  to  tinge  or  colour,  Ezek.  xxiii.  15 — 
tiarai  haptai — coloured  turbans.  The  text  is,  however,  doubtful. 
It  is  found  translated  wei  or  moisten,  twice ;  Dan.  iv.  30,  and 
V.  21.  "His  body  was  moistened,  or  wet,  with  the  dew  of 
heaven." 

Of  nineteen  occurrences  of  bapto  in  the  Old  Testament,  it  is 
once  translated  colour,  twice  wet,  twice  plunge,  and  fourteen 
times  dip.  The  only  question  remaining,  is,  How  is  baptizo 
translated  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  it  is  found  eighty 
times? 

Bapto,  with  its  compound  embapto,  is  found  six  times  in  the 
New  Testament ;  baptize  is  found  eighty  times ;  baptismos,  four 
times ;  baptisma,  twenty-two  times ;  and  baptistees,  fourteen 
times ;  in  all  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  times.  In  the  com- 
mon version,  bapto  and  embapto  are  always  translated  dip;  bap- 
tizo is  twice  translated  wasJi ;  baptismos  is  three  times  translated 
washing  ;  baptisma  and  baptistees  are  never  translated,  but  trans- 
ferred— the  former  into  ba2)tism,  and  the  latter  into  baptist. 
They  are  never  translated  by  any  of  the  words  sprinkle,  pour,  or 
purify.  Why  this  family  of  five  distinguished  members,  occur- 
ring one  hundred  and  twenty-six  times  in  one  small  volume, 
should,  in  two  of  its  members,  occurring  jointly  thirty-six  times, 
never  be  translated  at  all ;  and  why  the  main  branch,  baptizo 
itself,  consecrated  by  the  commission  to  a  most  important  pur- 
pose, should,  in  eighty  times,  have  been  translated  only  twice, 
and  then  by  a  term  so  vague  as  wash;  and  baptismos  three 
times  by  washing, — is  a  very  curious  problem  left  for  future  dis- 
cussion and  development. 

Meantime,  from  the  induction,  both  sacred  and  classical,  now 
given, — and  of  the  classical  ])ut  a  specimen  of  what  is  available 
has  been  given, — may  we  not,  without  farther  argument,  satis- 
factorily conclude  that  the  lexicographers  whose  testimony  we 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  133 

have  heard  had,  from  the  usus  loqiiendi — the  well-established 
law  of  public  usage — ample  authority  for  the  uniform  transla- 
tion of  these  words  in  their  proper,  original,  and  primitive  sense, 
by  the  terms  plunge,  dip,  or  immerse,  which  they  have  so  unani- 
mously and  so  decidedly  given  them  in  all  their  statements  ? 

It  is  with  the  proper  and  unfigurative,  and  not  with  the  fanci- 
ful and  rhetorical  meaning  of  words,  we  have  to  do  in  all  posi- 
tive institutions.  Sir  William  Blackstone  has  truly  said,  (and 
who  is  higher  authority  than  he?) — "The  words  of  a  law  are 
generally  to  be  understood  in  their  usual  and  most  known  sig- 
nification ;  not  so  much  regarding  the  propriety  of  grammar, 
as  their  general  and  popular  use :  but  when  words  bear  either 
none  or  a  very  absurd  signification,  if  literally  understood,  we 
must  a  little  deviate  from  the  received  sense  of  them."*  Bishop 
Taylor  has  also  well  said,  "  In  all  things  where  the  precept  is 
given  in  the  proper  style  of  laws,  he  that  takes  the  first  sense  is 
the  likeliest  to  be  well  guided.  In  the  interpretation  of  the 
laws  of  Christ,  the  strict  sense  is  to  be  followed."  Dr.  Jona- 
than Edwards,  the  greatest  of  American  Presbyterian  theolo- 
gians, has  truly  said,  "In  words  capable  of  two  senses,  the 
natural  and  proper  is  the  primary ;  and,  therefore,  ought,  in  the 
first  place  and  chiefly,  to  be  regarded."  A  greater  still,  Vitringa, 
has  said,  "This  is  accounted  by  all  a  constant  and  undoubted 
rule  of  approved  interpretation,  that  the  ordinary  and  most 
usual  signification  of  words  must  not  be  deserted,  except  for 
sufiicient  reasons."  To  similar  efi'ect  declare  Sherlock,  AVater- 
land,  Owen,  and  Dr.  Gumming,  as  quoted  in  Booth's  Defence  of 
his  Pedobaptism  Examined,  vol.  3,  London,  1792,  p.  253-256. 

Before  dismissing  this  subject,  we  must  yet  hear  Turretine, 
the  systematic  standard  theologian  of  the  orthodox  schools  of 
Presbyterianism.  His  words,  fairly  translated  are,  "It  is  ac- 
knowledged by  all  that  we  should  never  depart  from  the  proper 
and  native  signification  of  words,  except  for  the  weightiest  and 
most  urgent  reasons."!  We  shall  conclude  with  Dr.  Benson, 
another  favourite : — "What  can  be  more  absurd  than  to  imagine 
that  the  doctrines  or  rules  of  practice  which  relate  to  men's 
everlasting  salvation  should  be  delivered  in  such  ambiguous 
terms  as  to  be  capable  of  many  meanings?" J    Well  does  the 


*  Com.  vol.  i.  sec.  2.  t  De  Satisfactioue  Christi,  part  1,  sec.  23. 

X  Hist.  Bapt.,  Rolbertson,  p.  36. 

12 


134  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

English  PIrie  say,  "Law,"  and  as  fully  developed  in  chapter 
III.  of  this  work,  "  requires  words  and  phrases  of  the  most 
ascertained  and  unequivocal  sense." 

If  seven  such  names  as  are  here  given  are  not  valid  authority 
on  the  proper  interpretation  of  laws  and  positive  institutions, 
to  whom  shall  we  hearken  ?  Their  testimony  being  admitted, 
and  the  plain  and  unanimous  testimony  of  the  lexicographical 
jury  above  given,  on  the  proper,  current,  and  popular  use  and 
meaning  of  baptizo,  can  any  one  show  reason  why  we  should 
not,  a  second  time,  regard  my  first  proposition  as  fully  proved  ? 
All  the  dictionaries  give  dip  or  immerse  as  the  proper,  common, 
and  current  use  of  baptizo;  and  all  our  quotations  from  some 
thirty  of  the  most  classic  authors,  as  well  as  from  the  canonical 
Greek  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  sustain  them  in  so  doing. 
And  that  the  proper,  common,  and  current  use  of  words  is  to  be 
always  preferred  and  adopted  in  the  interpretation  of  laws  and 
ordinances,  is  attested  by  a  host  of  witnesses  of  the  highest  au- 
thority, and  sustained  by  Horn  and  Ernesti  in  their  canons  of 
interpretation.  I  repeat :  must  we  not,  then,  conclude  that  im- 
mersion, and  immersion  only,  is  Christian  baptism,  according  to 
the  mind  and  will  of  our  Lawgiver  and  Judge  ? 


CHAPTER  III. 

ANCIENT   VERSIONS. 


Argument  3. — Not  one  of  the  ancient  versions  uses  a  word  indicative 
of  sprinkling  or  pouring  water  on  a  person,  in  order  to  his  Christian 
baptism ;  but  all  concur  in  the  choice  of  a  term  intimating  immersion, 
dipping,  or  plunging  a  person,  if  any  allusion  be  made  to  the  form  of 
the  action. 

Evert  class  of  witnesses  summoned  with  reference  to  the  pro- 
position before  us  is  regarded  as  a  new  argument.  Indeed,  in 
strict  propriety,  every  single  witness  is  a  distinct  argument; 
but  we  do  not  so  count  them  in  this  discussion.  We  summon 
witnesses  in  classes  to  prove  certain  subordinate  propositions, 
which,  when  proved,  make  full  and  perfect  arguments  in  sup- 
port of  the  grand  proposition  touching  the  action  of  baptism. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  135 

But,  wheti  offering  a  new  argument,  or  summoning  a  new  class 
of  witnesses,  I  desire  it  to  be  clearly  understood  that  it  is  not  to 
fortify  a  previous  argument,  or  to  corroborate  witnesses  already 
adduced.  We  regard  every  single  argument  offered  as  full  and 
sufficient  of  itself,  if  we  had  not  another.  One  good  argument 
will  sustain  any  true  proposition ;  for  a  false  proposition  can 
never  bring  to  its  aid  one  sound  argument. 

The  next  class  of  witnesses  to  whose  testimony  we  invite  at- 
tention is  that  of  the  ancient  versions.  Of  these  the  oldest  is 
the  Peshito  Syriac  version,  supposed  to  have  been  completed 
early  in  the  second  century :  some  say,  at  the  close  of  the  first. 
Dr.  Henderson,  a  learned  Pedobaptist,  gives  it  as  his  opinion 
that  "  when  the  Lord  gave  the  commission  to  the  Apostles  to 
baptize  all  nations,  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  he  em- 
ployed the  identical  word  found  in  the  Peshito  Syriac  version/' 
That  word  for  haptizo  is  amad,  which,  this  aforesaid  Dr.  Hender- 
son maintains,  etymologically  signifies  ^^  stand  up  "  ^^  stand  erect " 
If  this  be  the  original  word  used  by  the  Saviour  in  his  native 
Syro-Chaldaic  language,  then  haptizo  found  in  our  Greek  copies 
must  be  a  translation  of  amad,  and,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Greek  translators  of  Matthew,  equivalent  to  it.  But  who  of 
the  Pedobaptist  school  will  presume  to  say  that  haptizo  means 
to  stand  up  or  stand  straight  ?  The  fact,  then,  is,  Dr.  Henderson 
is  vsTong  either  in  his  construction  of  amad,  or  our  Lord  could 
not  have  used  amad,  inasmuch  as  all  copies  have  haptizo  in  the 
commission,  according  to  Matthew:  and  no  man,  now-a-days, 
will  argue  that  haptizo  means  to  stand  up,  or  that  the  Syriac 
amad  means  to  sprinkle,  pour,  or  purify. 

One  might  argue  that  as  baptism  has  a  resurrection  in  it  as 
well  as  a  burial,  it  might  be  no  more  figurative  or  improper  to 
call  it  a  rising  up  to  a  new  life,  than  a  lying  down  or  putting 
off  of  an  old  one — an  emersion  as  well  as  an  immersion.  If, 
indeed,  as  some  Pedobaptists  suppose,  it  etymologically  means 
to  "  stand  up,''  or  "  rise  up,''  rather  than  to  be  buried,  it  makes 
nothing  at  all  against  our  views,  while  it  certainly  does  against 
infant  sprinkling :  for  who  could  make  an  infant  stand  up,  or 
stand  erect,  to  receive  a  drop  of  water  or  the  sign  of  a  cross  ? 

But  what  say  the  lexicons  ? 

"  Castel  and  his  editor  Michaelis,  Buxtorf,  and  Schaaf  are  all 
unanimous.  The  first  gives  the  following  meanings :  *  Ablutus 
est,  baptizatus  est.     Apliel,  immersit,  baptizavit.'    Buxtorf  gives, 


136  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

*  Baptizari,  intlngi,  ablui,  abluere  se.  EtTip.  Idem.  Apliel,  bap- 
tizare.'  Schaaf:  'Ablui  se,  ablutus,  intinctus,  immersus  m 
aquam,  baptizatus  est.  Ethpeel,  Idem  qiiod  Peal.  Aphel,  im- 
mersit,  baptizavit.'  Gutbier,  in  the  small  lexicon  afl&xed  to  his 
edition  of  the  Syriac  Testament,  gives  the  meaning,  *  Bap- 
tizavit,  baptizatus  est.  It.  sustentavit ;'  but  without  any  refer- 
ence to  support  the  last  meaning ;  and  it  is  apparently  intro- 
duced simply  for  the  purpose  of  deducing  from  the  verb  the 
noun  columna.  With  this  exception,  the  authority  of  the  lexi- 
cons referred  to  is  altogether  against  any  such  meaning  as  *  to 
stand.' " 

These  three  great  authorities  give  to  amad  the  very  same 
meanings  which  our  twelve  Greek  Lexicons  give  to  baptizo  and 
its  family — to  immerse,  dip,  or  plunge,  and,  figuratively,  to  wash 
or  cleanse. 

With  regard  to  the  Arabic  versions,  the  Persic,  Ethiopic,  the 
Egyptian  with  its  three  dialects,  the  Coptic  or  Memphitic,  the 
Sahidic  or  Thebaic,  and  the  Basmuric  of  the  Delta — to  all  of 
which  the  name  Coptic  is  often  applied  ;  and  with  regard  to  the 
Armenian,  Slavonic,  and  Gothic,  with  its  German,  Dutch, 
Swedish,  and  Danish  families,  down  to  the  Anglo-Saxon,  to  the 
history  of  all  of  which  I  have  paid  some  attention  so  far  as  to 
trace  the  developments  of  the  gospel  commission ;  I  shall  give 
the  result  of  my  investigations,  both  general  and  special,  in  the 
words  of  Mr.  Gotch,  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  in  his  critical 
examination  of  the  rendering  of  the  word  hapiizo  in  the  ancient 
and  many  of  the  modern  versions  of  the  New  Testament : — 

**  The  conclusions  to  which  the  investigation  leads  us,  are — 

"With  regard  to  the  ancient  versions,  in  all  of  them,  with  thi'co 
exceptions,  (viz.  the  Latin  from  the  third  century,  and  the  Sahi- 
dic and  Basmuric,)  the  word  hap)tizo  is  iraiialated  by  words 
purely  native;  and  the  three  excepted  versions  adopted  the 
Greek  word,  not  by  way  of  transference,  but  in  consequence  of 
the  term  having  become  current  language. 

"  Of  native  words  employed,  the  Syriac,  Arabic,  Ethiopic,  Cop- 
tic, Armenian,  Gothic,  and  earliest  Latin,  all  signify  to  immerse; 
the  Anglo-Saxon,  both  to  immerse  and  to  cleanse ;  the  Persic,  to 
wash ;  and  the  Slavonic,  to  cross.  The  meaning  of  the  word 
adopted  from  the  Greek,  in  Sahidic,  Basmuric,  and  Latin,  being 
also  to  immerse. 

2.  "With  regard  to  the  modern  versions  examined,  the  Eastern 
generally  adhere  to  the  ancient  Eastern  versions,  and  translate 
by  words  signifying  to  immei'sc.  Most  of  the  Gothic  dialects, 
viz.  the  German,  Swedish,  Dutch,  Danish,  &c.,  employ  altered 
forms  of  the  Gothic  word  signifying  to  dip.     The  Icelandic  uses 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 


137 


a  word  meaning  cleanse.  The  Slavic  dialects  follow  the  ancient 
Slavonic  ;  and  the  languages  formed  from  the  Latin,  including 
the  English,  adopt  the  word  bajjfizo  ;  though,  with  respect  to 
the  English,  the  words  wash  and  christen  were  formerly  used,  as 
well  as  baptize. 

It  may  perhaps  be  acceptable  to  place  these  results  together 
in  a  tabular  form,  as  follows : — 


VERSION. 

DATE. 

WORD  EMPLOYED. 

MEANING. 

Syriac  : 

Peshito, 

2d  cent. 

amad, 

immerse. 

Philoxenian, 

6th  cent. 

amad, 

immerse. 

Arabic  : 

Polyglot, 

7th  cent. 

amada  47  times, 

immerse. 

Propaganda, 

1671 

amada, 

immerse. 

Sabat, 

1816 

amada, 

immerse. 

Persic, 

8  th  cent. 

shustan  &  shuyida 

n,  wash. 

Ethiopic  : 

4th  cent. 

shustan, 

immerse. 

Amharic, 

1822 

shustan, 

immerse. 

Egyptian  : 

Coptic, 

3d  cent. 

tanaJca, 

f  immerse, 
\  plunge. 

Sahidic, 

2d'cent. 

>  baptizOy 

Basmuric, 

3d  cent. 

immerse. 

Armenian, 

5th  cent. 

viogridil, 

immerse. 

Slavonic : 

9th  cent. 

krestiti, 

cross. 

Russian, 

1519 

1 

Polish,_ 

1585 

Bohemian, 

1593 

i 

Lithuanian, 

1660 

■  same  rooty 

j 

cross. 

Livonian,  or 

Lettish,     1685 

Dorpat  Esthonian,        1727 

&c.  &c. 

Gothic  : 

4th  cent. 

daitpjan, 

dip 

German, 

1522 

taiifen, 

dip. 

Danish, 

1524 

dobe, 

dip. 

Swedish, 

1534 

dopa, 

dip. 

Dutch, 

1460 

doopen, 

dip. 

&c.  &c. 

Icelandic, 

1584 

shira. 

cleanse. 

Anglo-Saxon, 

8th  cent. 

dijppan,  fullianf 

dip,  cleanse. 

Latin  : 

Of  the  early  fathers  8th  cent. 

tingo, 

immerse. 

Ante-Hieronymian,  3d  cent. 

baptizo, 

immerse. 

Vulgate, 

4th  cent. 

baptize, 

immerse. 

French, 

1535 

baptiser, 

immerse. 

Spanish, 

1556 

bapfizar, 

immerse. 

Italian, 

1562 

bapttezzare, 

immerse. 

&C.  ifcc. 

12* 


WORD  EMPLOYED. 

MEANING. 

wash,  christen, 
baptize, 

immerse. 

baptize, 

bedyddiOj 

bathe. 

baisdim, 

bathe. 

baisdeam. 

bathe:' 

138  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

VERSION.  DATE. 

English:  Wicklif,  1380 

Tindal,  1526 

Welsh,  1567 

Irish,  1602 

Gaelic,  1650 

Here,  then,  we  have  sixteen  ancient  versions,  six  of  them  in 
the  2d  and  3d  centuries,  and  ten  of  them  completed  before  the 
close  of  the  9th,  indicative  of  immersion — one,  from  the  sign 
made  in  baptism  by  the  Romanists,  is  rendered  cross.  From  the 
9th  century,  we  have  twenty  more,  all  indicative  of  the  same  fact. 
In  all  these,  we  have  thirty-six  foreign,  and  many  of  them  an- 
cient versions,  in  proof  of  our  first  proposition. 

In  all  these,  it  is  not  once  rendered  by  the  word  sprinkle  or 
pour.  The  investigation  of  Mr.  Gotch  goes  to  show,  moreover, 
that  the  notion  of  either  transferring  the  original  word  into 
translations,  or  of  manufacturing  new  words,  has  no  counte- 
nance from  these  thirty-six  ancient  and  modern  versions.  Ho 
very  justly  observes — 

"  Our  investigation,  then,  shows  that  it  has  not  been  the  prac- 
tice of  translators,  until  quite  recent  times,  to  adopt  the  plan  of 
*  transference'  in  respect  to  the  word  baptizo.  The  word  has 
been  translated,  in  most  instances,  by  a  term  strictly  native  ;  or, 
where  the  term  has  been  derived  from  the  Greek,  it  appears  to 
have  become  naturalized  in  the  respective  languages  before  the 
translation  was  made.  There  is  no  instance,  until  of  late  years, 
in  which  it  can  be  shown  that  the  translators  made  the  word ; 
and  it  well  deserves  the  consideration  of  all  who  are  engaged  in 
translating,  or  disseminating  translations  of  the  word  of  God, 
how  far  such  a  plan  is  justifiable.  It  may,  indeed,  be  said,  that 
though  the  word  baptizo  has  not  been  thus  transferred,  other 
words  have ;  and  that  thereby  the  pi-inciple  of  transference  is 
countenanced  by  former  translators.  It  is  certain  that  such 
words  as  proper  names,  and  designations  of  things  which  are 
not  known,  and  therefore  have  no  word  by  which  they  can  be 
expressed,  must  be  so  rendered:  but  what  proof  is  there  of 
translators,  in  general,  carrying  transference  farther  than  this  ? 
Let  it  be  remembered,  that  the  Greek  language  was  closely 
united  to  the  Latin,  to  which  the  appeal  has  been  frequently 
made  ;  and  that  on  this  account,  Greek  words  were  continually 
naturalized  in  it.  Such  words  we  may  expect  to  meet  with  ; 
but  to  prove  that  translators  transferred  words  in  the  modern 
sense  of  the  term,  it  must  be  shown  that  words,  the  meaning  of 
which  might  have  been  expressed  in  the  language,  were  given, 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.  13 

not  only  by  terms  derived  from  the  Greek,  but  without  meat 
ing ; — being  made  for  the  occasion,  and  purposely  left  withoi 
definition.  It  will  not  surely  be  said  that  the  word  haptizo  hi. 
no  meaning, — that  a  command,  involving,  as  most  Christiai 
believe,  a  thing  to  be  done  by  or  for  every  disciple,  yet  convex 
no  definite  idea  of  what  is  to  be  done.  We  are  not  now  inqur. 
ing  what  that  meaning  is  :  every  one  who  attempts  to  translai 
the  word  of  God  is  bound  to  judge  for  himself  on  that  poin 
Let  him  so  judge,  and  give  the  result  of  his  judgment." 
To  all  which  we  cheerfully  assent. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ENGLISH   TRANSLATORS. 


Argument  4. — No  English  translator,  known  to  me,  has  at  any  tin 
translated  any  word  of  the  Bapto  family  by  the  words,  sprinkle,  pou 
or  purify. 

By  English  translators,  we  understand  those  who  have  mad 
into  our  vernacular  a  translation  of  any  of  the  books  of  th 
Apostolic  writings,  or  of  the  whole  volume.    In  the  late  Lon! 
don  Hexapla,  which  lies  before  me,  first  puolished  by  Baxter! 
London,  1841,  there  are  the  six  most  prominent  English  ver 
sions ;   viz.  that  of  Wicklif,  a.  d.  1380  ;    Tyncale,  1584 ;   Cran- 
mer,  1539  ;  Geneva,  1557  ;  Anglo  Rhemish,  ltS2  ;  Authorized, 
1611.    Besides  these  six  versions,  of  most  distinguished  fame, 
I  have  more  than  as  many  others  of  much  respectability ;  and 
some  of  them,  upon  the  whole,  of  equal  literary  merit, — such  as' 
Doddridge's,  Thompson's,  Wesley's,   Penn's,  tie  Anonymous, 
Campbell's  Four  Gospels,  McKnight's  Epistles,  Stuart's  version 
of  the  Romans  and  Hebrews — works  of  much  merit,  besides 
some  others  of  minor  fame,  not  including  a  Baptist  version,  i 
which,  although  I  am  in  many  points  better  pleased  with  it  than 
with  the  common,  I  deem  it  improper  to  admit  into  this  class  of  i 
witnesses.     Now,  of  some  fifteen  complete  versions  on  my  shelf, 
besides  several  partial  ones,  not  one  has  ever  translated  any 
word  of  the  Bapto  family  by  the  words,  sprinkle,  pour,  or  purify. 

But  I  make  my  appeal,  not  only  to  the  translations  themselves, 
but  to  the  authors  of  them, — to  as  many  of  them,  at  least,  as 


140'  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

have  written  or  spoken  freely  on  the  subject,  to  whose  writings 
and  opinions  we  have  had  access,  directly  or  indirectly.  Wil- 
liam Tyndale:  "  TJie  plunging  into  water  signifieth  that  we  die 
and  are  buried  with  Christ,  as  concerning  the  old  life  of  sin, 
which  is  Adam ;  and  the  pulling  out  again  signifieth  that  we  rise 
^(/am  with  Christ  in  a  new  life.''  Beza:  ^[Baptizein  does  not 
signify  to  wash  but  by  consequence  ;  for,  properly,  it  signifies 
to  immerse  for  the  sake  of  dyeing  or  tinging." — Vol.  ii.  p.  27, 28. 
The  translators  of  the  common  version  were  all,  or  nearly  all, 
genuine  Episcopalians,  and,  at  the  very  time  they  made  the 
version,  were  accustomed  to  use  a  liturgy  which  made  it  the 
minister's  duty,  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  "  to  take  the  child 
and  dip  it  in  the  water"  contained  in  the  font.  I  have  seen 
copies  of  James'  version,  printed  in  1611,  which  contain  the 
psalms  and  the  service  of  the  church,  in  which  frequent  allu- 
sions are  made  to  immersion,  all  indicative  of  the  fact  that  it 
was  then  regarded  as  the  primitive  and  proper  baptism ;  conse- 
quently, these  translators  accepted  the  king's  appointment  and 
restrictions,  to  retain  baptize  and  baptism,  rather  than  translate 
them,  and  on  no  occasion  favoured  the  innovation  of  sprinkling 
by  any  rendering,  or  note  marginal,  in  that  translation. 

Doddridge,  on  i.cts  viii.  38,  says,  "  Baptism  was  generally  ad- 
ministered by  immersion,  though  I  see  no  proof  that  it  was  essen- 
tial to  the  institution.  It  would  be  very  unnatural  to  suppose 
that  they  went  down  to  the  water  merely  that  Philip  might  take 
up  a  little  water  in  his  hand  to  pour  on  the  eunuch.  A  person 
of  his  dignity  hfid,  no  doubt,  many  vessels  with  him  in  his  bag- 
gage on  such  a  journey  through  so  desert  a  country — a  precau- 
tion absolutely  necessary  for  travellers  in  these  parts,  and  never 
omitted  by  them."*  On  Romans  vi.  4,  Doddridge  repeats  the 
same  views,  saying — "  It  seems  the  part  of  candour  to  confess, 
that  here  is  an  allusion  to  the  manner  of  baptizing  by  immer- 
sion, as  most  usual  in  these  early  times."  Of  course,  then,  this 
erudite  and  pious  Congregationalist  could  never  render  any 
member  of  this  family  by  any  word  intimating  any  action  dif- 
ferent from  immersion. 

McKnight,  also,  not  only  in  his  Epistles,  but  also  in  his  Har- 
mony, bears  witness  to  the  true  and  proper  meaning  of  the  word. 

*  Sec  Dr.  Shaw's  Travols,  Preface,  p.  4. 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  141 

He  substitutes  dip  for  wash  in  Mark  vii.  4 :  For  when  they  come 
from  market,  except  they  dip  themselves,  they  eat  not.* 

The  divers  washings  of  the  ninth  of  the  Hebrews,  common 
version,  he  translates  into  divers  immersions,  and  thus  restores 
two  of  the  mistranslations  of  haptizo  back  to  their  proper  meaning. 
In  his  comments  on  Rom.  vi.  and  Col.  ii.,  and  in  many  other 
passages,  he  boldly  asserts  immersion  as  the  proper  baptism, 
practised  and  taught  in  the  primitive  age : 

*'  In  baptism,  the  rite  of  initiation  into  the  Christian  Church 
the  baptized  person  is  buried  under  the  water,  as  one  put  to 
death  with  Christ  on  account  of  sin,  in  order  that  he  may  be 
strongly  impressed  with  a  sense  of  the  malignity  of  sin,  and  ex- 
cited to  hate  it  as  the  greatest  of  evils,  ver.  3.  Moreover,  in 
the  same  rite,  the  baptized  person  being  riised  up  out  of  the 
water,  after  being  washed,  he  is  thereby  taurht  that  he  shall  be 
raised  from  the  dead  with  Christ,  by  the  pover  of  the  Father, 
to  live  with  him  for  ever  in  heaven,  provided  he  is  prepared  for 
that  life  by  true  holiness,  ver.  4,  5.  Farther  by  their  baptism, 
believers  are  laid  under  the  strongest  obligtions  to  holiness, 
because  it  represents  their  old  man,  their  old  orrupt  nature,  as 
crucified  with  Christ,  to  teach  them  that  theii  body,  which  'sin 
claimed  as  its  property,  being  put  to  death,tvas  no  longer  to 
serve  sin  as  its  slave.'' 

"  Christ's  baptism  was  not  the  baptism  of  reentance ;  for  he 
never  committed  any  sin :  but,  as  was  observe,  Prelim.  Ess.  1, 
at  the  beginning,  he  submitted  to  be  baptizi,  that  is,  to  be 
hurled  under  the  water  by  John,  and  to  be  rais€  out  of  it  a^ain, 
as  an  emblem  of  his  future  death  and  resuriction.  In^'like 
manner,  the  baptism  of  believers  is  emblematal  of  their  own 
death,  burial,  and  resurrection.  See  Col.  ii.  \  note  1.  Per- 
haps also  it  is  a  commemoration  of  Christ's  bajsm. 

"  He  tells  the  Romans,  that  since  they  were  larded  together 
in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  namely,  when  the3vere  baptized 
they  shall  he  also  planted  together  in  the  likenessf  his  resurrec- 
tion, by  being  raised  to  a  new  life  in  the  body  atie  last  day. 

"  The  burying  of  Christ  and  of  believers,  first  the  water  of 
baptism,  and  afterwards  in  the  earth,  is  fitly  en.gh  compared 
to  the  planting  of  seeds  in  the  earth,  because  thtffect  in  both 
cases  is  a  reviviscence  to  a  state  of  greater  perfecla.'-' 

*'  Being  hurled  with  him  in  baptism.  Christ  begf  his  ministry 
with  receiving  baptism  from  John,  to  show  in  an  em.matic  man- 
ner, that  he  was  to  die  and  to  rise  again  from  thread.  And 
after  his  resurrection,  he  commanded  his  discipkto  initiate 
mankind  into  his  religion,  by  baptizing,  them,  as  himself  had 


*  Sec.  64,  p.  362. 


142  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

"been  baptized,  to  show,  that  although  they  shall  die,  like  him, 
through  the  malignity  of  sin,  yet,  as  certainly  as  he  rose  from 
the  dead,  believers  shall  be  raised  at  the  last  day,  with  bodies 
fashioned  like  to  his  glorious  body.  Wherefore,  his  disciples 
having  been  baptized,  as  he  was,  and  for  the  very  same  purpose, 
they  are  fitlv  said  to  be  huriecl  with  Christ  in  baptism ;  and  in 
baptism  to  be  raised  with  him.'' 

"  The  circumcision  which  Christ  performs,  being,  accom- 
plished by  tbe  influence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  on  the 
minds  of  believers  ;  and  their  belief  of  ^  these  doctrines  being 
founded  on  their  belief  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  their  be- 
li<^f  of  that  great  aiiracle  is  justly  represented  as  the  means, 
wkereby  thev  are  raised  out  of"  the  water  of  baptism  new  crea- 
tures who,  as  the  apostle  observes  in  the  next  verse,  are,  like 
Christ  to  be  raised  at  the  last  day,  to  an  eternal  life  in  the 
body."* 

Dr.  George  Cam)bell  need  scarcely  be  named  in  this  place, 
inasmuch  as  his  vsws  of  haptizo  and  haptismos  are  so  clearly, 
fully  and  repeateiy  declared.  A  single  passage  from  him  is 
all  that  we  shall  (note  at  present : 

"  'Undergo  anmmersion  like  that  which  I  must  undergo,'  to 
ha'ptisma  ho  ego  >aptizomai  haptistlienai.  English  translation : 
To  be  baptized  -vrth  the  baptism  that  I  am  to  be  baptized  with. 
The  primitive  Bonification  of  haptisma  is  immersion ;  of  hap- 
iizein  to  immers^  plunge,  or  overwhelm.  The  noun  ought  never 
to  be'  rendered  iptism,  nor  the  verb  to  baptize,  but  when  em- 
ployed in  relatic  to  a  religious  ceremony.  The  verb  haptizein 
sometimes,  and  aptein,  which  is  synonymous,  often  occurs  in 
the  Septuagint  £d  Apocryphal  writings,  and  is  always  rendered 
in  the  common  Jrsion  by  one  or  other  of  these  words,  to  clip,  to 
wash  to  plungi  When  the  original  expression,  therefore,  is 
rendered  in  failiar  language,  there  appears  nothing  harsh  or 
extraordinary  :the  metaphor.  Phrases  like  these,  to  be  over- 
whelmed withi'ief,  to  be  immersed  in  affliction,  will  be  found 
common  in  m(i  languages."    _  ,     ,      .     , 

"  The  word«P^<'2<^'''^  hoth  in  sacred  authors  and  classical, 
sio-nifies,  to  dito  plunge,  to  immerse,  and  was  rendered  by  Ter- 
tuUian  the  o^st  of  the  Latin  fathers,  tingere,  the  term  used  for 
dyeing' cloth ''hich  was  by  immersion.  It  is  always  construed 
suitaljiy  to  ^^  meaning.  Thus  it  is,  en  udati,  en  to  lordane. 
But' I  shoupot  lay  much  stress  on  the  preposition  en,  which, 
onQWAvino-  4he  Hebrew  heth,  may  denote  loith  as  well  as  in. 
did  not  thehole  phraseology,  in  regard  to  this  ceremony,  con- 
cur in  evii<'g  ^^^  same  thing.     Accordingly,  the  baptized  are 


*  Boston  ll^lO.  six  vols.  Vol.  i.  p.  283.    Also,  on  Rom.  vi.  4,  5,  p.  288.    Again, 
vol.  iu.  p.  5^*^^  ^^1- 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.  '  143 

said  anahainein,  to  arise,  emerge,  or  ascend,  Matthew  iii.  17,  apo 
tou  udatos,  and  Acts  viii.  39,  ek  tou  udatos,  from,  or  out  of  the  wa- 
ter. Let  it  be  observed  further,  that  the  verbs  raino  and  rantizo, 
used  in  Scripture  for  sprinlding,  are  never  construed  in  this 
manner.  I  will  sprinlde  you  with  clean  water,  is  in  the  Septua- 
gint,  Raino  epV  umas  katharon  hudor,  and  not  as  baptizo  is 
always  construed.  Raino  umas  en  katliaro  udati.  See  also  Ex. 
xxxix.  21.  Leviticus  vi.  27,  xvi.  14.  Had  baptizo  been  here 
employed  in  the  sense  of  raino,  I  sprinkle,  (which,  as  far  as  I 
know,  it  never  is,  in  any  use,  sacred  or  classical,)  the  expression 
•would  doubtless  have  been  Ego  baptizo  eph  umas  udor,  or  apo 
tou  udatou,  agreeably  to  the  examples  referred  to.  When,  there- 
fore, the  Greek  word  baptizo  is  adopted,  I  may  say,  rather  than 
translated  into  modern  languages,  the  mode  of  construction 
ought  to  be  preserved  so  far  as  may  conduce  to  suggest  its  ori- 
ginal import.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  we  have  so  much  evi- 
dence that  even  good  and  learned  men  allow  their  judgments  to 
be  warped  by  the  sentiments  and  customs  of  the  sect  which 
they  prefer.  The  true  partisan,  of  whatever  denomination, 
always  inclines  to  correct  the  diction  of  the  Spirit  by  that  of  the 
party.''* 

Beza  observes,  on  Mark  vii.  4 :  "  Christ  commanded  us  to  be 
baptized  ;  by  which  word,  it  is  certain,  immersion  is  signified  ; 
haptizestliai,  in  this  place,  is  more  than  niptein;  because  that 
seems  to  respect  the  whole  body,  this  only  the  hands.  Nor  does 
haptizein  8\gm.iy  to  wash,  except  by  consequence  ;  for  it  properly 
signifies  to  immerse  for  the  sake  of  dyeing.  To  be  baptized  in 
water,  signifies  no  other  than  to  be  immersed  in  water,  which  is 
the  external  ceremony  of  baptism.  Baptizo  difi'ers  from  the 
verb  dunai,  which  signifies  to  plunge  in  the  deep  and  to  drown." 

After  such  testimonies  as  the  above,  it  would  seem  superflu- 
ous to  add  from  Wesley  such  concessions  as  his  remarks  on 
Rom.  vi.  4:  "  We  are  buried  with  him,"  &c.  "  Alluding  here 
to  the  ancient  manner  of  baptizing  by  immersion ;"  or  to  the 
concessions  of  Stuart,  who  has  said  : 

"  That  the  Greek  fathers,  and  the  Latin  ones  who  were  fami- 
liar with  the  Greek,  understood  the  usual  import  of  the  word 
baptizo,  would  hardly  seem  to  be  capable  of  a  denial.  That 
they  might  be  confirmed  in  their  view  of  the  import  of  this  word, 
by  common  usage  among  the  Greek  classic  authors,  we  have 
seen  in  the  first  part  of  this  dissertation. 

"  For  myself,  then,  I  cheerfully  admit,  that  baptizo  in  the  New 
Testament,  when  applied  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  does  in  all  pro- 
bability involve  the  idea,  that  this  rite  was  usually  performed 
by  immersion,  but  not  always." 

*  Campbell's  Dissertations,  vol.  iv.  p.  128,  and  p.  24. 


144  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

Evident,  then,  it  is,  not  only  that  the  English  translators  did 
not  even  translate  baptizo,  or  its  lineage,  by  the  words  pour, 
sprinkle,  or  purify,  but  that  they  could  not  so  translate  them 
from  their  knowledge  of  the  ancient  customs  and  the  classic  and 
sacred  use  of  these  terms. 

Thus,  then,  we  have,  by  a  new,  distinct,  and  independent  class 
of  witnesses,  of  the  highest  celebrity  for  eminent  literary  at- 
tainments and  for  highly  cultivated  and  refined  conscientious- 
ness, furnished  another  argument  in  proof  of  our  first  proposi- 
tion, which,  without  regard  to  any  other,  would  seem  sufficient 
to  establish  it  beyond  the  possibility  of  refutation.  For,  will 
not  that  distinguished  doctor.  Common  Sense,  whom  all  be- 
lieve, naturally  conclude  that  so  many  learned,  conscientious,  and 
religious  men,  having  so  much  at  stake  themselves,  continually 
sprinkling  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  would,  if  they  could,  have 
given  some  countenance  to  their  own  favourite  practice,  by  trans- 
lating some  one  or  more  of  these  one  hundred  and  twenty-six 
occurrences  of  these  terms  in  a  way  favourable  to  their  own  be- 
loved practice.  Certain  it  is,  then,  that  their  practice  had  some 
other  foundation  than  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  the  apostolic 
commission,  concerning  which  foundation  we  may  hereafter 
speak. 


CHAPTER  V. 

Argument  5. — Reformers,  Annotators,  Paraphrasts,  and  Critics. 

Our  fifth  argument  in  support  of  this  proposition  shall  con- 
sist of  the  testimony  of  reformers,  annotators,  paraphrasts,  and 
critics,  touching  the  meaning  of  the  terms  in  dispute,  and  the 
ancient  usage, — selected  from  those  only  who  favoured  sprink- 
ling or  pouring  as  a  more  convenient,  comfortable,  and  polite 
usage. 

At  the  head  of  the  list,  we  must  place  Luther. 

In  the  5th  of  the  Smalcald  articles  drawn  up  by  Luther,  he 
says,  *'  Baptism  is  nothing  else  than  the  word  of  God  with  im- 
mersion in  water." 

*'  Baptism  is  a  Greek  word,  and  may  be  translated  immersion, 
as  when  we  immerse  something  in  water,  that  it  may  be  wholly 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  145 

covered.  And  although  it  is  almost  wholly  abolished,  (for  they 
do  not  dip  the  whole  children,  but  only  pour  a  little  water  ou 
them,)  they  ought  nevertheless  to  be  wholly  immersed,  and  then 
immediately  drawn  out ;  for  that  the  etymology  of  the  loord  seems 
to  demand."'  "  Washing  of  sins  is  attributed  to  baptism  ;  it  is 
truly,  indeed,  attributed,  but  the  signification  is  softer  and 
slower  than  it  can  express  baptism,  which  is  rather  a  sign  both 
of  death  and  resurrection.  Being  moved  by  this  reason,  I  would 
have  those  that  are  to  be  baptized,  to  be  altogether  dipt  into  the 
water,  as  the  word  doth  sound,  and  the  mystery  doth  signify."* 

Calvin :  "  The  word  haptizo  signifies  to  immerse,  and  it  is 
certain  that  immersion  was  the  practice  of  the  ancient  church.^f 

Grotius :  The  great  Grotius  says,  "  That  this  rite  was  wont  to 
be  performed  by  immersion,  and  not  by  perfusion,  appears  both 
by  the  propriety  of  the  word  and  the  places  chosen  for  its  ad- 
ministration, John  iii.  23,  Acts  viii.  38,  and  by  the  many  allu- 
sions of  the  Apostles,  which  cannot  be  referred  to  sprinkling, 
Bom.  vi.  3,  4,  Col.  ii.  12.  The  custom  of  perfusion  or  aspersion 
seems  to  have  obtained  some  time  after,  in  favor  of  such  who 
lying  dangerously  ill  were  desirous  to  dedicate  themselves  to 
Christ:  These  were  called  Clinics  by  other  Christians.  See 
Cyprian's  Epistle  to  Magnus  to  this  purpose.  Nor  should  we 
wonder  that  the  old  Latin  fathers  use  tingere  for  baptizare,  see- 
ing the  Latin  word  tiiigo  does  properly  and  generally  signify  the 
game  as  mersare,  to  immerse  or  plunge.^J 

Dionysius  Petavius:  "  And  indeed,"  says  he,  "immersion  is 
properly  styled  baptismos,  though  at  present  we  content  our- 
selves with  pouring  water  on  the  head,  which  in  Greek  is  called 
perixusis,  that  is,  perichysm,  if  I  may  so  Anglicize,  but  not  bap- 
tism." 

Casaubon  :  "  For  the  manner  of  baptizing,"  says  he,  "  was  to 
plunge  or  dip  them  into  the  water,  as  even  the  word  baptizein 
itself  plainly  enough  shows,  which,  as  it  does  not  signify  dunein 
to  sink  down  and  perish,  neither  certainly  does  it  signify  epipo- 
lazein,  to  swim  or  float  a-top ;  these  three  words,  epipolazein,  bap- 
tizein, dunein,  being  very  different." 

Vitringa :  "  The  act  of  baptizing  is  the  immersion  of  believers 
in  water.     This  expresses  the  force  of  the  word."^ 

Salmasius :  "  Baptism  is  immersion,  and  was  administered  in 
former  times  according  to  the  force  and  meaning  of  the  word."|| 

Hospinianus :  "  Christ  commanded  us  to  be  baptized ;  by 
which  it  is  certain  immersion  is  signified."^ 

Zanchius :  "  The  proper  signification  of  baptize  is  to  immerse, 
plunge  under,  to  overwhelm  in  water." 


*  Op.  vol.  i.  336.  t  iTosiit.  b.  4.  s.  15. 

+  Math.  iii.  6.  Gale.  g  Aphor.  Sanct  Theol.  Aphoris. 

II  De  Caesarie  Virorum,  p.  669.     ^  Hist.  Sacram.  1.  ii.  c.  i.  30. 
13 


146  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

Alstedlus:  "To  hapiize  signifies  only  to  immerse;  not  to  wash, 
except  by  consequence/' 

Witsius:  *'It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  native  signification  of 
the  words  haptein  and  hapteizein  is  to  plunge,  to  dip."* 

Gurtlerus :  "To  baptize,  among  the  Greeks,  is  undoubtedly  to 
immerse,  to  dip ;  and  baptism  is  immersion,  dipping.  Baptismos 
en  Pneumati  hagio,  baptism  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  immersion  into 
the  pure  waters  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  for  he  on  whom  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  poured  out,  is,  as  it  were,  immersed  into  him.  Baptis- 
mos enpuri,  'baptism  in  fire,'  is  a  figurative  expression,  and  sig- 
nifies casting  into  a  flame,  which,  like  water,  flows  far  and  wide ; 
such  as  the  flame  that  consumed  Jerusalem.  The  thing  com- 
manded by  the  Lord,  is  baptism ;  immersion  into  water.'^f 

Baddaeus  :  "  The  words  haptizein  and  baptismos  are  not  to  be 
interpreted  of  aspersions,  but  always  of  immersion.''^ 

Ewing,  of  Glasgow:  ^''  Baptizo,  in  its  primary  and  radical  sense, 
I  cover  with  water.  It  is  used  to  denote,  1st.  I  plunge,  or  sink 
completely  under  water." 

Leigh:  "The  native  and  proper  signification  of  it  \haptize\  is, 
to  dip  into  water,  or  to  plunge  under  water."        f 

Bossuet:  "  To  baptize  signifies  to  plunge,  as  is  granted  by  all 
the  world." 

Vossius,  as  quoted  by  Gale:  "The  great  Vossius  speaks  exactly 
to  the  same  purpose,  and,  indeed,  almost  in  the  same  words ;  for 
without  ever  taking  the  least  notice  of  lavo,  or  the  like,  he  ex- 
pressly says,  that  hapto  and  haptizo  are  rendered  by  merge  or 
mergito,  and  tingo,  yet  they  properly  signify  mergo;  and  tingo 
only  by  a  metalepsis,  i.  e.  as  tingo  implies  mergo:  and,  therefore, 
he  adds,  tinging  follows  immersion,  and  is  done  by  it." 

Venema:  "  The  word  haptizein,  to  baptize,  is  nowhere  used  in 
the  Scripture  for  sprinkling."^ 

Bloomfield:  "There  is  here  [Kom.  vi.  4]  plainly  a  reference 
to  the  ancient  mode  of  baptism  by  immersion ;  and  I  agree 
with  Koppe  and  Rosenmuller,  that  there  is  reason  to  regret  it 
should  have  been  abandoned  in  most  Christian  churches,  espe- 
cially as  it  has  so  evident  a  reference  to  the  mystic  sense  of 
baptism." 

Scholz,  on  Matt.  iii.  6 :  "  Baptism  consists  in  the  immersion 
of  the  whole  body  in  water." 

Augusti:  "The  word  baptism,  according  to  the  etymology 
and  usage,  signifies  to  immerse,  submerge,  &c.,  and  the  choice 
of  the  word  betrays  an  age  in  which  the  later  custom  of  sprink- 
ling had  not  been  introduced." 

Buttman,  in  his  Larger  Grammar,  simply  puts  down,  "bapto, 
to  immerse." 

*  In.  Hifl.  Ecc.  p.  138.  t  Institut.  Theo.  cap.  xxxiii.  gg  108,  109, 110, 125. 

J  Theolog.  Dogmat.  1.  v.  c.  i.  2  6.  2  "Vol.  p.  5. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  147 

Edinburgh  Reviewers  of  Carson's  work :  "  They  tell  me  (says 
Mr.  Carson)  that  it  was  unnecessary  to  bring  forward  any  one 
of  the  examples  to  prove  that  the  word  signifies  to  dip, — that  I 
might  have  commenced  with  this  as  a  fixed  point  universally 

ADMITTED.'' 

Before  dismissing  this  host  of  witnesses,  sine  die,  while  we 
have  the  Greek  lexicographers,  Greek  classics,  Bible  translators, 
reformers,  annotators,  paraphrasts,  and  critics  before  us,  all  con- 
curring with  perfect  unanimity  in  giving  to  baptize,  the  word 
in  the  apostolic  commission,  the  primary  and  proper  meaning 
of  dip,  immerse,  plunge,  and  no  other  figurative  or  rhetorical 
meaning  incompatible  therewith,  I  shall,  to  relieve  the  reader 
from  so  much  attention  to  the  mere  documentary  details  of  evi- 
dence, institute  an  argument  on  one  philological  fact,  or  law  of 
language,  which  not  only  gives  a  satisfactory  reason  for  this 
truly  marvellous  concurrence,  but  also  itself  constitutes  a  new 
argument,  so  far,  at  least,  as  to  show  that  this  word  never  can 
have  but  one  meaning.  The  force  of  this  argument  requires 
only  a  concession  which  no  man  can  refuse,  namely,  that  baptizo 
once  signifies  to  dip  or  immerse.  This  point  conceded,  and,  ac- 
cording to  the  law  in  such  cases,  it  must  always  signify  to  dip, 

Mr.  Carson,  one  of  the  most  acute  and  able  critics  on  this 
subject,  affirms  that  words  of  mode  have  but  one  meaning,  and 
that  baptizo  is  a  verb  of  mode.  To  that  canon  I  unhesitatingly 
assent.  It  is  incontrovertibly  true.  Still,  whether  baptizo  be  a 
word  of  mode  may  be  questioned.  It  is,  indeed,  denied  by 
some,  and  although  without  proper  evidence,  still,  in  this  case, 
it  is  to  my  mind  objectionable,  for  two  reasons : — 1st.  In  tho 
profound  policies  of  the  more  ingenious  Pedobaptists,  the  whole 
controversy  concerning  the  baptismal  action  was  converted  into 
a  mere  question  of  mode.  The  less  educated  and  unsuspecting 
Baptists  were  ensnared  by  it ;  and,  as  their  more  prudent  oppo- 
nents designed,  for  some  two  centuries  there  have  been  on  the 
theatre  no  less  than  three  modes  of  baptism.  One  baptism  with 
three  modes !  A  grand  ecclesiastical  hoax !  All  have  been  en- 
trammelled  by  it.  And  yet,  like  the  lunar  hoax,  it  only  required 
a  single  reflection  to  annihilate  it.  Translate  the  one  baptism 
and  the  three  modes  by  their  proper  significants,  and  the  sophis- 
try is  exposed.  One  immersion  by  any  one-  of  the  modes,  sprink- 
ling, pouring,  or  immersing!  Or  substitute  one  pouring,  by 
the  mode  of  immersion,  sprinkling,  or  pouring ! !     I  do  not 


148  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

recollect  to  have  ever  seen  this  sophism  exposed  before  my  de- 
bate with  Mr.  Walker,  in  June,  1820. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  it  may  be  asked,  of  what  action  is 
immersion  the  mode?  It  is  not  necessarily,  but  accidentally  a 
mode  of  washing,  because  there  is  neither  soap  nor  water  in  hap- 
iizo.  It  is  not  necessarily  a  mode  of  staining,  dyeing,  colouring, 
purifying,  any  more  than  of  polluting,  burning,  or  destroying. 
Of  what  general  action  is  it,  then,  the  mode  ?  !  It  may,  indeed, 
be  perchance  a  mode  of  cleansing,  purifying,  washing,  colour- 
ing, &c.,  but  only  by  accident,  and  not  from  necessity.  For 
these  two  reasons,  I  am  unwilling,  under  all  the  ordinary  cir- 
cumstances of  this  case,  to  adopt  the  definition  that  '^baptizo  is 
a  word  of  mode''  I  would  rather  say,  it  is  a  word  of  sjpecifia 
action.  i 

All  verbs  of  action  are  either  generic  or  specific.  They  indi- 
cate indefinite  or  definite  action.  There  is  nothing,  for  example, 
specific  in  the  words  cleanse,  wash,  purify,  sanctify,  go,  come, 
&c.  There  is  nothing  specific  in  the  word  travel ;  but  there  is 
in  the  words  ride,  walk,  swim,  sail.  There  is  nothing  specific 
in  the  word  move ;  but  there  is  in  creep,  run,  hop,  leap,  fly,  &c. . 
Now,  as  Dr.  G.  Campbell  has  well  observed,  "  There  is  a  great 
difierence  between  the  mention  of  any  thing  as  a  duty,  especially, 
of  that  consequence  that  the  promises  or  threats  of  religion; 
depend  on  the  performance  or  neglect  of  it,  and  the  bare  record-, 
ing  of  an  event  a,8fact;  as  in  the  former  the  words  ought  to  he  as 
special  as  possible,  that  there  may  be  no  mistake  in  the  applica- 
tion of  the  promise,  no  pretence  for  saying  that  more  was  exacted 
than  was  expressed  in  the  conditions ;  but  in  relating  facts,  it 
is  often  a  matter  of  indifi'erence  whether  the  terms  be  general  or 
special.'^* 

In  the  judgment,  then,  of  this  greatest  and  soundest  of  bibli- 
cal critics,  baptizo  ought  to  be  a  specific  term,  and  not  one  of 
vague,  indefinite,  or  generic  sense.  And  that  it  is  so,  a  little  re- 
flection, methinks,  will  render  most  apparent  to  all.  Something: 
was  to  be  done  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c.  This  is  of  itself; 
evidence  that  the  action  was  specific  ;  for,  if  the  name  into  which; 
it  was  to  be  performed  was  specific,  certainly  it  is  as  important 
that  the  action  itself  should  have  been  specifically  commanded. 
Nay,  had  it  not  been  specifically  commanded,  how  could  the 

*  Four  Gospels,  vol.  i.  dis.  6,  par.  2,  g  20. 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.  14^ 

ordinance  be  obeyed?  He  could  not  possibly  mean  "purify 
them,"  for  the  Messiah,  having  presented  no  form  of  purifica- 
tion, could  not  have  expected  obedience,  unless  he  had  specified 
the  action  to  be  done. 

But  there  is  no  need  of  any  other  proof  that  haptizo  indicates 
a  specific  act,  than  the  two  facts : — 1st.  That  it  is  to  be  applied 
to  all  manner  of  subjects  or  substances, — to  wine,  oil,  blood, 
water,  sand,  debt,  grief,  sorrow,  spirit;  and  that  it  signifies  to 
dip,  at  least,  sometimes,  says  the  whole  learned  world.  Now, 
a  word  that  once  signifies  to  immerse,  never  can  signify  to  pour 
or  sprinkle ;  because  no  three  acts  are  more  specifically  difler- 
ent  than  these ;  and  because  it  is  essential  that  a  specific  term 
have  but  one  meaning:  for  example,  if  to  walk  and  to  ride  were 
both  indicated  by  the  same  word,  who,  on  hearing  that  word, 
could  know  which  action  was  performed  ?  If,  then,  haptizo  once 
mean  dip,  it  never  can  mean  sprinkle,  pour,  or  purify,  unless 
these  actions  are  identically  the  same. 

So  obvious  is  this,  that  a  person  might  risk  even  his  life  upon 
the  fact  that,  if  immersing  a  person  was  a  capital  ofience,  and 
if  A  B,  when  charged  with  it  by  the  judges,  proves  that  he  only 
sprinkled  water  upon  him,  there  is  not  a  jury  of  twelve  men 
compos  mentis  in  America  that  will  not  exonerate  him  from  the 
crime.  This  view  of  the  subject  is  susceptible  of  much  ampli- 
fication. But  we  have  space  only  to  state  it  in  unambiguous 
terms.  Baptizo  means  to  dip,  by  consent  of  the  whole  world, 
and  being  a  specific  word,  it  never  can  have  but  one  meaning, 
just  as  the  word  sprinkle  never  can  mean  to  dip. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


Argument  6. — English  Lexicographers,  Encyclopedias,  and  Reviewers,  of 
the  Pedohaptist  School. 

Our  sixth  argument  shall  consist  of  a  few  testimonies  from 
some  of  our  most  eminent  English  lexicographers,  encyclopedias, 
and  reviews,  of  the  Pedobaptist  school. 

Richardson,  the  most  learned  of  English  lexicographers,  in- 
terprets the  word  baptizo  and  its  family  thus :  "  To  dip,  or  merge 

13* 


150  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

frequently,  to  sink,  to  plunge,  to  immerge/'    He  concludes  his 
long  list  of  quotations  with  a  few  lines  from  Cowper — 

Philosophy,  baptized 
In  the  pure  fountain  of  eternal  lore, 
Has  eyes,  indeed,  and  viewing  all  she  sees 
As  meant  to  indicate  a  God  to  man, 
Giyes  him  his  praise,  and  forfeits  not  her  own. 

Cowper^s  TasTc,  Book  3. 

Dr.  Johnson,  in  his  Dictionary,  says,  "  To  baptize  is  to  chris- 
ten, to  administer  the  sacrament  of  baptism  to  one.  Baptism, 
an  external  ablution  of  the  body,  with  a  certain  form  of  words." 
This  surely  is  popular  and  ecclesiastic  enough.  But,  as  quoted 
by  Boswell,  he  says — 

"  Dr.  Johnson  argued  in  defence  of  some  of  the  peculiar  tenets 
of  the  church  of  Rome.  As  to  giving  the  bread  only  to  the 
laity,  he  said,  "  They  may  think  that,  in  what  is  merely  ritual, 
deviations  from  the  primitive  mode  may  be  admitted  on  the 
ground  of  convenience ;  and  I  think  they  are  as  well  warranted 
to  make  this  alteration,  as  we  are  to  substitute  sprinkling  in  the 
room  of  the  ancient  baptism."* 

The  Monthly  Reviewers  of  England  say — 

**  We  acknowledge  there  are  many  authorities  to  support  it 
[immersion]  among  the  ancients.  The  word  baptize  doth  cer- 
tainly signify  immersion,  absolute  and  total  immersion,  in  Jose- 
phus  and  other  Greek  writers,  -h-  *  *  The  examples  pro- 
duced, however,  do  not  exactly  serve  the  cause  of  those  who 
think  that  a  few  drops  of  water  sprinkled  on  the  forehead  of  a 
child,  constitutes  the  essence  of  baptism.  In  the  Scptuagint,  it 
is  said  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  baptized  with  the  dew  of  hea- 
ven ;  and  in  a  poem  attributed  to  Homer,  called  The  Battle  of 
the  Frogs  and  Mice,  it  is  said  that  a  certain  lake  was  baptized 
with  the  blood  of  a  wounded  combatant — [Ebapteto  d  aimati 
limne  porpureo.)  A  question  has  arisen,  in  what  sense  the 
word  baptize  can  be  used  in  this  passage.  Doth  it  signify  im- 
mersion, properly  so  called?  Certainly  not:  neither  can  it 
signify  a  partial  sprinkling.  A  body  wholly  surrounded  with 
a  mist ;  wholly  made  humid  with  dew ;  or  a  piece  of  water  so 
tinged  with  and  discolored  by  blood,  that  if  it  had  been  a  solid 
body  and  dipped  into  it,  it  could  not  have  received  a  more  san- 
guine appearance,  is  a  very  different  thing  from  that  partial  ap- 
plication which  in  modern  times  is  supposed  sufficient  to  consti- 
tute full  and  explicit  baptism.  The  accommodation  of  the  word 
baptism  to  the  instances  we  have  referred  to  is  not  unnatui-al, 
though  highly  metaphorical ;  and  may  be  resolved  into  a  tropo 

u 

*  Life  of  Johnson,  vol.  2,  p.  499,  509. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  151 

or  figure  of  speech,  in  which,  though  the  primary  idea  is  main- 
tained, yet  the  mode  of  expression  is  altered ;  and  the  word 
itself  is  to  be  understood  rather  allusively  than  really ;  rather 
relatively  than  absolutely.  If  a  body  had  been  baptized  or  im- 
mersed, it  could  not  have  been  more  wet  than  Nebuchadnezzar's ; 
if  a  lake  had  been  dipped  in  blood,  it  could  not  have  put  on  a 
more  bloody  appearance. 

*'  Hitherto  the  Antipedobaptists  [or  Baptists]  seem  to  have 
had  the  best  of  the  argument  on  the  mode  of  administering  the 
ordinance.  The  most  explicit  authorities  are  on  their  side. 
Their  opponents  have  chiefly  availed  themselves  of  inference^ 
analogy,  and  doubtful  construction"* 

It  is  due  to  our  opponents,  that  when  we  quote  their  special 
pleaders,  we  ought  to  give  their  testimony  on  both  sides. 

Chambers'  Cyclopedia,  or  Dictionary  of  Arts  and  Sciences: 
London,  1786.  "  Baptism,  in  Theology ;  formed  from  the  Greek 
baptizo,  of  bapio — /  dip  or  plunge,  a  rite  or  ceremony  by  which 
persons  are  initiated  into  the  profession  of  the  Christian  religion. 

"  The  practice  of  the  Western  Church  is  to  sprinkle  the  water 
on  the  head  or  face  of  the  person  to  be  baptized,  except  in  the 
Church  of  Milan,  in  whose  ritual  it  is  ordered  that  the  head  of 
the  infant  be  plunged  three  times  into  the  water ;  the  minister 
at  the  same  time  pronouncing  the  words,  *  I  baptize  thee  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost' — importing 
that  by  this  ceremony  the  person  baptized  is  received  among 
the  professors  of  that  religion,  which  God,  the  Father  of  all, 
revealed  to  mankind  by -the  ministry  of  his  Son,  and  confirmed 
by  the  miracles  of  his  Spirit.  A  triple  immersion  was  first  used, 
and  continued  for  a  long  time :  this  was  to  signify  either  the 
three  days  that  our  Saviour  lay  in  the  grave,  or  the  three  per- 
sons in  the  Trinity.  But  it  was  afterwards  laid  aside,  because 
the  Arians  used  it :  it  was  thought  proper  to  plunge  but  once. 
Some  are  of  the  opinion,  that  sprinkling  in  baptism  was  begun 
in  cold  countries.  It  was  introduced  into  England  about  the 
beginning  of  the  ninth  century.  At  the  Council  of  Celchyth,  in 
816,  it  was  ordered  that  the  priest  should  not  only  sprinkle  the 
holy  water  upon  the  head  of  the  infant,  but  likewise  plunge  it 
in  the  bason.  There  are  abundance  of  ceremonies  delivered  by 
ecclesiastical  writers,  as  used  in  baptism,  which  are  now  dis- 
used ;  as  the  giving  milk  and  honey  to  the  baptized,  in  the  East ; 
wine  and  milk  in  the  West,  &c. 

"  The  opinion  of  the  necessity  of  baptism  in  order  to  salvation, 
is  grounded  on  these  two  sayings  of  our  Saviour:  'He  that  be- 
lieveth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved ;'  and,  *  Except  a  man  bo 

*  Mouthly  Review,  vol.  Ixx.  p.  496. 


152  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God/  " 

Brande's  Cyclopedia:  New  YorJc,  1843.  "Baptism,  [Gr.hapio,- 
I  dip.)  The  rite  of  initiation  into  the  community  of  Christians, 
ordained  by  Christ  himself,  when  he  commissioned  his  Apostlea 
to  go  and  baptize  all  nations  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  Baptism  was  originally  administered  by  immersion,  which 
act  is  thought  by  some  to  be  necessary  to  the  sacrament.  It  is 
not  clear,  however,  even  in  the  Scripture  History,  that  this  cere- 
mony was  always  adhered  to.  At  present,  sprinkling  is  gene- 
rally substituted  for  dipping,  at  least  in  northern  climates." 

Taf/Io7^s  Calmet,  "  Baptism  is  taken  in  Scripture  for  suffer- 
ings :  '  Can  ye  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  of,  and  be  baptized 
with  the  baptism  which  I  am  baptized  with  V  Mark  x.  38.  And 
Luke  xii.  50,  *  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptized  with,  and  how 
am  I  straitened  till  it  be  accomplished?'  We  find  traces  of 
similar  phraseology  in  the  Old  Testament,  (Ps.  Ixix.  2,  3,)  where 
waters  often  denote  tribulations  ;  and  where,  to  be  swallowed 
up  by  the  waters,  to  pass  through  great  waters,  &c.,  signifies  to 
be  overwhelmed  by  misfortunes. 

*'  There  is  a  very  sudden  turn  of  metaphor  used  by  the 
Apostle  Paul,  in  Kom.  vi.  3-5.  '  Know  ye  not  that  so  many  of 
us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  his 
death  ?  therefore  we  are  buried  loith  him  by  baptism  into  his  death 
— that  we  should  walk  in  newness  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been 
planted  together  [with  him]  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall 
be  also  planted  in  the  likeness  of  his  resurrection.'  Noav  what 
has  baptism  to  do  ^xih.  planting  ?  Wherein  consists  their  simi- 
larity, so  as  to  justify  the  resemblance  here  implied  ?  In  1  Peter 
iii.  21,  we  find  the  Apostle  speaking  of  baptism,  figuratively,  as 
*  saving  us  ;'  and  alluding  to  Noah,  who  long  lay  buried  in  the 
ark,  iis  corn  long  lies  buried  in  the  earth.  Now,  as  after  having 
died  to  his  former  course  of  life  in  being  baptized,  a  convert  was 
considered  as  rising  to  a  renewed  life,  so,  after  having  been  sepa- 
rated from  his  former  connections,  his  seed-bed,  as  it  were,  after 
having  died  in  being  planted,  he  was  considered  as  rising  to  re- 
newed life  also." 

Edinburgh  Encyc.  "  In  the  time  of  the  Apostles  the  form  of 
baptism  was  very  simple.  The  person  to  be  baptized  was  dip- 
ped in  a  river  or  vessel,  with  the  words  which  Christ  had  ordered, 
and,  to  express  more  fully  his  change  of  character,  generally  as- 
sumed a  new  name.  The  immersion  of  the  whole  body  was 
omitted  only  in  the  case  of  the  sick,  who  could  not  leave  their 
beds.  In  tins  case,  sprinkling  was  substituted,  which  was  called 
clinic  baptism.  The  Greek  church,  as  well  as  the  scliisraatics  in 
the  East,  retained  the  custom  of  immersing  the  whole  body ;  but 
the  Western  church  adopted,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  the  mode 


ACTION  or  BAPTISM.  153 

of  baptism  by  sprinkling,  whicli  has  been  continued  by  the  Pro- 
testants, Baptists  only  excepted." 

These  we  deem  a  fair  specimen  of  this  species  of  testimony. 
To  these  many  more  might  be  adduced,  but  without  increasing 
authority.  Amongst  these  Encyclopedias  and  Dictionaries  are 
the  chief  standards  and  originals  of  the  modern.  Most  of  the 
Dictionaries  commonly  in  use,  like  Webster  and  Walker,  give 
no  meaning  of  the  terms  but  that  in  common  use.  With  them 
they  mean  what  modern  practice  says,  to  christen,  to  sprinkle, 
or  to  immerse.  The  elder  ones,  before  the  controversy  became 
so  warm,  gave  the  original  and  proper  meaning  of  this  much 
and  long  litigated  word. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


Argument  7. — Words  used  in  construction  with  BapHzo,  Ratno,  Eantizo, 
Cheo,  and  Louo,  such  as  epi,  en,  eis,  ek,  apo. 

Our  seventh  argument,  in  development  and  confirmation  of 
the  true  meaning  of  baptizo,  is  derived  from  the  words  used  in 
construction  with  it,  as  contradistinguished  from  all  its  rivals, 
raino,  cheo,  louo,  and  the  prepositions,  epi,  en,  eis,  ek,  apo,  used 
in  construction  with  them. 

We  shall  commence  with  epi,  the  word  essential  to  the  use  of 
raino,  rantizo,  and  that  family.  For  the  reasons  already  given, 
we  are  obliged,  in  positive  laws  and  precepts,  to  take  all  the 
words  in  their  primitive,  proper,  or  common,  and  not  in  their 
figurative  and  pecuhar  significations.  Epi  frequently  signifies  on 
or  upon;  en,  generally,  in ;  eis,  into ;  ek,  of,  out  of,  or  from ;  and 
apo,  from.  But  we  have  a  shorter  and  more  satisfactory  way  of 
ascertaining  the  use  and  import  of  these  prepositions  than  the 
more  common  method  of  comparing  all  their  occurrences :  We 
take  them  and  their  principals  together.  For  in  this  way  there 
is  less  room  for  false  and  inconclusive  reasoning,  and  the  most 
illiterate  may  thus  comprehend  them.  We  shall  illustrate  this 
by  taking  raino,  and  its  compound  perirraino,  and  epi,  together, 
and  hapto  and  baptizo,  with  en  and  eis,  as  they  are  found  in  com- 
mon usage.     I  assert,  then,  that  for  some  reason  raino  and  epi 


154'  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

agree  together ;  haptizo  and  en  also  agree  together ;  but  raino 
and  en,  or  haptizo  and  epi,  so  perfectly  disagree,  as  never  to 
be  found  construed  in  amity  in  any  Greek  author,  sacred  or 
profane. 

1.  Perirranei  epi  ton  katharisthenta,  sprinkle  the  blood  upon 
him  to  be  cleansed,  Lev.  xiv.  7.  2.  Perirranei  epi  teen  oikian, 
sprinkle  upon  the  house.  Lev.  xiv.  51.  3.  Ranei  epi  hilasierionf 
he  shall  sprinkle  it  upon  the  mercy-seat.  Lev.  xvi.  14.  This 
phrase  occurs  the  second  time  in  the  same  verse.  Perirranei  epi 
ton  oikon,  he  shall  sprinkle  it  upon  the  house ;  epi  ta  skeua,  upon 
the  furniture ;  epi  tas  psuchas,  upon  the  persons.  The  same 
idiom  is  here  found  three  times  in  one  verse,  Num.  xix.  18. 
Again,  in  the  19th  verse,  Perirranei  epi  ion  akatharton,  he  shall 
sprinkle  it  upon  the  unclean.  Again,  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25.  Rano  epi 
7mmas  katliaron  liudoor,  I  will  sprinkle  upon  you  clean  water. 
In  construction,  then,  with  the  person  upon  whom  water  is 
sprinkled,  the  verb  raino  is  followed  by  epi ;  never  by  en  or  eis. 
A  sprinkles  water,  blood,  oil,  dust,  or  ashes  upon  B ;  but  never 
sprinkles  B  in  blood,  oil,  dust,  &c. :  whereas,  haptizo  in  such, 
cases  is  followed  by  en  and  eis ;  never  by  ejn.  A  immerses  B, 
not  upoji,  or  with,  but  in  water.  This  is  a  most  convincing  fact 
that  haptizo,  occurring  eighty  times  in  the  New  Testament,  is 
never  construed  with  epi,  nor  rai7io  with  e7i  or  eis.  Baptizo  is  fre- 
quently construed  with  en  and  eis,  and  raino  with  epi;  but  they 
tiever  interchange  these  particles.  A  shadow  does  not  more 
naturally  accompany  an  object  standing  in  the  sunshine,  in  this 
latitude,  than  does  epi  accompany  raino,  and  en,  haptizo,  in  the 
cases  described. 

All  this  is  equally  true  in  the  case  of  cheo,  to  pour.  The  pb- 
ject  on  which  water  or  any  thing  is  poured,  is  designated  by  epi; 
never  by  en.  The  thing  poured  or  sprinkled  always  follows  the 
verb  to  pour  or  sprinkle  ;  the  person  is  always  preceded  by  upon. 
Neither  of  these  facts  ever  occurs  in  the  case  of  haptizo.  In 
that  case,  the  person  follows  the  verb;  and  the  material  in  which 
the  action  is  performed  is  always  preceded  by  en,  expressed  or 
understood.  Ilence,  the  uniform  construction  in  the  one  case  is, 
"I  immerse  B  in  water;"  in  the  other  case,  the  construction  is, 
"  I  pour,  or  sprinkle  water  npon  B."  Not  more  clearly  different 
are  these  two  constructions  in  English  than  they  are  in  Greek. 
Indeed,  the  object  immersed  is  never  governed  by  a  preposition; 
the  object  sprinkled  or  poiurcd  is  always  governed  by  a  preposition. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  155 

The  actions,  then,  in  the  original  are  just  as  distinct  as  are  the 
words  baptizo,  cTieo,  raino,  and  their  respective  constructions. 

Louo,  to  wash,  is  "by  some  supposed  to  be  identical  with  bap- 
tizo. They  imagine  that  because  baptizo  is  metaphorically  ren- 
dered by  louo,  to  wash,  in  a  few  instances,  they  must  be  identi- 
cal in  meaning.  But  such  is  not  the  fact.  Baptizo  is  sometimes 
figuratively  rendered  by  louo;  but  louo  is  never  rendered  by 
baptizo!  Hence  louo  and  baptizo,  and  their  representatives,  to 
wash  and  to  baptize,  are  not  convertible  terms.  But,  in  the  defi- 
nition of  words,  the  word  defined  and  the  definition  must  in  all 
cases  be  convertible,  if  the  definition  be  a  correct  one.  Hence, 
baptizo  does  not  mean  to  wash,  except  by  accident,  metonymi- 
cally.  To  one  accustomed  to  read  the  New  Testament  with  a 
critical  eye,  these  are  facts  which  clearly  forbid  such  an  assump- 
tion. For  instance,  louo  and  baptizo  occur  in  the  same  sentence, 
and  sometimes  in  the  same  clause  of  a  sentence,  in  direct  con- 
tradistinction. Thus,  in  the  case  of  the  jailer.  Acts  xvi. :  "He 
washed  their  stripes  and  was  baptized.''  And  Ananias  said  to 
Paul,  "  Arise,  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins.'' 

It  is  not  said,  be  washed,  and  then  wash  away  thy  sins.  It 
does  not  say,  "  he  washed  their  stripes,  and  was  washed  himself 
and  all  his  family."  These  examples  most  satisfactorily  demon- 
strate that  the  Apostles  never  used  baptizo  and  louo,  or  immerse 
and  wash,  as  convertible  or  equivalent  terms.  Baptism,  is, 
therefore,  not  washing;  nor  washing,  baptism ;  in  virtue  of  the 
meaning  of  the  original  terms.  Rantizo  and  louo  are  as  inimi- 
cal as  baptizo  and  louo,  for  we  find  them  standing  in  the  same 
clause  together.  Thus,  Paul — '*  Having  your  hearts  sprinkled 
from  an  evil  conscience,  and  your  bodies  washed  with  clean 
water."  Sprinkling  and  washing  are,  therefore,  as  inconvertible 
as  immersion  and  washing. 

The  precision  of  the  Greek  language,  and  its  uniformity  in 
the  use  of  words  in  general,  and  of  some  words  in  particular,  is 
truly  remarkable.  The  Greeks  that  spoke  and  wrote  during  the 
last  three  hundred  years  of  the  Jewish  dispensation,  had  three 
words  usually  translated  wash.  These  are,  nipto,  l&uo,  pluTw. 
They  never,  in  sacred  use,  confound  them.  These  three  repre- 
sent three  kinds  of  washing,  and,  consequently,  one  of  them  is 
never  substituted  for  the  other.  Nipto,  I  have  found  thirty-four 
times  in  the  Greek  scriptures  of  both  institutions ;  plum,  seven- 
teen times  J  and  louo,  twenty-five  times.    The  first  has  respect 


156  ACTION  OP   BAPTISM. 

to  the  hands  and  feet ;  the  second,  to  garments  and  to  polluted 
persons  and  things ;  and  the  third,  to  persons  and  things, 
whether  polluted  or  not.*  Bathing,  the  medicinal  use  of  water, 
and  cleansing  from  legal  impurities,  are  set  forth  by  louo.  Hence 
Naaman,  the  leper,  when  commanded  to  bathe  {louo),  dipped 
himself  in  the  Jordan  seven  times.  I  have  never  found  epi  in 
construction  with  nipto,  louo,  or  pluno,  any  more  than  with  hap- 
tizo.  We  find  en,  however,  in  construction  with  them  all ;  be- 
cause the  hands,  feet,  face,  person,  and  garments  might  all  be 
washed  in  some  liquid,  but  not  upon  it. 

The  congruity  of  things,  therefore,  calls  for  certain  preposi- 
tions in  construction  with  verbs  of  action ;  and  these  go  very 
far  to  settle  any  thing  doubtful  in  the  acceptation  of  the  princi- 
pal word  in  any  given  passage.  Now,  as  baptizo  has  frequently 
both  en  and  eis  construed  with  the  liquid  or  material  used  in  the 
ordinance,  and  raino  and  cheo  never,  follows  it  not  that  these  pre- 
positions demonstrate  a  meaning  in  these  words  wholly  incom- 
patible with  each  other,  so  far  as  action  is  concerned  ? 

It  is  as  impossible  either  to  pour  or  sprinkle  a  man  into  or  in 
a  river,  as  it  is  to  immerse  him  upon  it,  or  to  immerse  water 
upon  him.  It  is,  therefore,  offering  the  grossest  violence  to  all 
the  laws  of  congruous  construction  to  attempt  to  translate  bap- 
tizo  by  sprinkle,  pour,  or  purify ;  or  raino  and  clieo  by  immerse, 
plunge,  or  overwhelm.  The  best  lexicography,  both  of  the  prin- 
cipals and  their  usual  retinue  of  particles  and  circumstances, 
peremptorily  forbids  such  liberties.  Concerning  ek  and  apo^ 
we  shall  say  something  in  our  next  argument. 

*  See  the  following  references : — 

Nipto  is  found,  Gen.  xviii.  4 ;  xix.  2 ;  xxiv.  32 ;  Ex.  xxx.  19,  20,  21 ;  Gen.  xl.  24, 
31;  Deut.  xxi.  6;  Judg.  xix.  21 ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  41;  2  Sam.  xi.  8;  2  Chron.  iv.  8;  Ps. 
xxvi.  6;  iTiii.  10;  Ixxiii.  13;  Canticles  v.  3.  In  the  New  Testament,  Matt.  vi.  17; 
XV.  2;  Mark  vii.  3 ;  John  ix.  7 ;  vii.  11;  xi.  15;  xiii.  5,  6,  8;  viii.  8,  10, 12;  xiv.  14; 
1  Tim.  V.  10.  In  all  these  places,  wash  hands,  feet,  or  face,  and  nothing  else. 
Pluno  is  found,  Lev.  vi.  27;  xiii.  54,  55,  58  ;  xiv.  8.  9;  xvii.  16;  2  Chron.  iv.  6;  Ps. 
li.  2,  7 ;  Jer.  ii.  22 ;  iv.  14 ;  Gen.  xlix.  11 ;  Isa.  iv.  4 ;  Ezek.  xvi.  9 ;  Rev.  vii.  14.  Louo, 
Lev.  xiv.  8;  Deut.  xxiii.  11;  Lev.  xiv.  8;  xvii.  16;  xv.  16;  xvi.  4,  24;  xxii.  6;  Ex. 
xxix.  4;  xl.  12;  U.  5;  Ruthiii.  6;  2  Kings  v.  10, 12,  13;  ix.  30;  Isa.  1.16;  2  Sam. 
xu.  20;  Ezek.  xvi.  4,  9;  Acts  ix.  37;  xvi.  33;  lCor.vi.ll;  Heb.  x.  22 ;  2  Peter  iii.  22. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  157 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

Argitment  8. — The  places  where  Baptism  was  anciently  administered. 

Our  eighth  argument  is  derived  from  the  places  where  the 
ordinance  of  baptism  was  anciently  administered ;  which  will 
etill  farther  develop  the  force  of  the  prepositions  in  construc- 
tion with  bapfizo. 

Baptism  was  first  administered  in  rivers.  The  first  Baptist, 
during  his  public  ministry,  spent  much  of  his  time  on  the  banks 
of  the  Jordan.  Thither  resorted  to  him  "  all  Judea  and  Jeru- 
salem, and  were  baptized  of  him  in  the  Jordan,  confessing  their 
sins.''  They  were  not  baptized  upon  Jordan,  nor  were  they 
baptized  with  Jordan,  nor  was  Jordan  baptized  upon  them  ;  but 
they  were  baptized  in  Jordan.  Our  English  in  is  but  the  adop- 
tion of  the  Greek  en.  The  Romans  borrowed  their  in  from  the 
Greeks,  and  we  borrowed  our  in  from  the  Romans  ;  and  all 
these  ins  are  of  one  and  the  same  signification  and  construction. 
In  is  neither  at,  with,  nor  by ;  except  by  figure.  It  is  literally 
in.  In  the  house,  is  not  at  the  house,  with  the  house,  nor  by  the 
house  ;  but  in  the  house. 

Now,  as  epi  does  not  bring  the  Jordan  upon  them,  and  as  ds 
and  en  place  them  in  the  river,  the  meaning  of  eh  and  apo  is  by 
necessity  established  as  assisting  the  baptized  to  emerge  out  of 
the  river. 

If  the  liberty  which  Pedobaptists  have  taken  with  these  pre- 
positions, in  the  heat  of  controversy,  has  called  forth  the  admi- 
ration and  reproofs  of  their  own  most  learned  and  soberminded 
men,  why  should  it  be  thought  strange  that  we  should  be  as- 
tounded at  the  recklessness  of  such  men  as  Dr.  Miller  of  Prince- 
ton, and  others,  who,  in  defiance  of  their  own  reputation  for 
learning  and  good  sense,  have  contradicted,  in  express  terms,  all 
our  lexicographers,  translators,  reformers,  historians  and  distin- 
guished critics,  for  the  sake  of  the  papal  dogma  of  infant  rant- 
ism,  consecrated  by  John  Calvin,  John  Knox,  Theodore  Beza, 
and  their  adherents. 

On  counting  the  actual  occurrences  of  en  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, I  find  it  is  found  2660  times.    Of  this  immense  number  of 

14 


158  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

times,  though  these  learned  doctors  tell  you  of  its  two-and-twenty 
meanings,  it  is  translated  in  your  common  testament  2045  times 
by  in.  Yet  such  critics  as  Dr.  Miller,  when  he  puts  on  his  Pe- 
dobaptist  spectacles,  will  have  it  loith  always  when  baptism  is 
alluded  to.  John  baptizes  loitJi  water ;  but,  when  the  phrase 
comes,  en  to  Jordanee,  he  passes  it  by.  He  does  not  say,  he  bap- 
tized them  with  Jordan ;  but,  passing  it  by,  he  says  that  eis 
means  at  or  to,  in  such  cases.  Well,  not  having  time  to  count 
over  the  whole  book,  I  found  in  the  four  gospels  that  eis  occurs 
795  times.  Of  these,  it  is  translated  by  into  372  times,  and  by 
to,  for  into,  more  than  one  hundred  times  ;  for  to  the  house,  to 
the  temple,  to  the  city,  to  Jerusalem,  Bethany,  Nazareth,  &c., 
means  into;  and  of  273  times  unto,  it  might  have  been  very 
often  into ;  thus  making,  in  all,  500  out  of  795  occurrences. 

As  for  ek  and  apo,  frequently  rendered  out  of  and  from,  it  is, 
on  two  accounts,  unnecessary  to  speak  particularly ;  because, 
first,  whether  they  are  more  commonly  rendered  \>j  from,  or  out 
of  avails  nothing,  seeing  th?it  from,  nine  times  in  ten,  is  out  of, 
in  sense.  For  example,  from  heaven,  from  the  temple,  from  the 
city,  from  the  grave,  means  out  of  these  places,  and  not  from 
the  boundaries  of  them.  In  the  second  place,  it  being  evident 
that  baptizo,  with  e7i  and  eis,  most  certainly  places  the  subject 
in  the  pool,  in  the  river,  or  in  the  bath,  ek  and  apo  must  bring 
them  out  of  it. 

Fancy  or  taste  may  increase  indefinitely  the  figurative  mean- 
ing of  words ;  but  the  number  of  figurative  meanings  is  of  no 
philological  account  in  fixing  the  common  or  proper  meaning  of 
any  word ;  still  less  the  mere  connectives  of  speech. 

The  partial  and  one-sided  mode  of  interpretation  is  nowhere 
more  apparent  than  in  the  cavils  about  these  prepositions.  AVe 
shall  produce  but  a  single  example :  Epi  and  en  will  illustrate 
the  matter.  After  raino  or  cheo,  epi  is  always  translated  npon^ 
without  one  demurrer  in  all  the  Pedobaptist  ranks  ;  yet  epi,  out 
of  920  times  in  the  New  Testament,  is  translated  by  upon  only 
158  times,  that  is,  about  once  in  six  times  :  whereas,  en  is  trans- 
lated four  times  in  every  five  by  in.  Yet  to  sprinkle  upon  is 
never  cavilled  at  by  a  Pedobaptist ;  while  to  baptize,  or  immerse 
in,  is  always  repudiated  as  an  unwarrantable  licence  on  the  part 
of  a  Baptist ! ! 

But  the  reason  given  why  John  baptized  at  Enon,  one  would 
think,  ought  to  silence  every  doubt  or  cavil  on  that  question. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  159 

But,  alas  for  frail  human  nature !  it  will  not  always  "be  per- 
suaded, though  one  rose  from  the  dead.  Hence,  although  we 
are  expressly  told  that  John  baptized  at  Enon,  because  there  was 
much  water  there,  the  spirit  of  the  sectary  sets  about  to  prove 
that  there  was  not  much  water  there,  but  only  a  few  rivulets. 
And,  if  at  last  he  is  constrained  to  admit,  that  even  many  pools 
might  be  collected  from  many  rivulets,  he  sets  about  finding 
some  other  use  for  the  many  rivulets  and  pools  than  for  the  per- 
formance of  baptism.  In  his  heated  imagination,  he  sees  all 
the  dromedaries  and  camels  of  Arabia  carrying  the  people  to 
John's  tent,  and,  that  these  thirsty  animals,  coming  off  their 
long  journey,  might  have  something  to  drink,  the  humane  John, 
who  always  kept  a  bason  and  a  squirt  upon  his  table  for  the 
purpose  of  baptizing,  pitched  his  tent  near  to  Enon  for  the  sake, 
not  of  baptizing,  but  of  watering  the  caravans  that  flocked  to  his 
baptism.  Credat  Judceus  Apella,  non  ego.  To  argue  against 
imagination,  is  like  arguing  against  love  or  our  instinctive  ap- 
petites. Still  we  must  remark,  that  poUa  hudata  signifies  much 
water,  and  that  John  the  Apostle  uses  the  phrase  in  his  writings 
no  less  than  Jive  times ;  the  other  instances,  too,  all  requiring 
much  water.  The  mystic  mother  of  papal  Rome  sits  on  "many 
waters."  Are  these  little  rivulets,  indeed !  The  voice  of  God, 
too,  is  compared  to  the  sound  of  many  waters  1  Can  these  be 
rivulets  ? 

John,  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  style,  uses poUahtidaia,  in  the 
plural  form,  for  much  waterj  I  believe  we  never  have  hudor  in 
the  singular  number  in  all  the  Septuagint ;  hence,  we  are  con- 
firmed in  the  belief  that,  in  Jewish  style,  the  plural  form  indi- 
cates much  water,  just  as  the  word  always  indicates  to  us. 

But  does  not  the  sentence  itself  refute  the  presumptuous  con- 
struction sometimes  imposed  on  it.  Beads  it  not,  that  John 
baptized  at  Enon  for  a  given  reason  ?  He  did  not  encamp  or 
lodge  there  for  that  reason  ;  but  he  baptized  there  for  that 
reason.  Hence,  the  baptizing  and  the  reason,  much  water,  most 
fairly  and  honourably  go  together.  John  baptized  at  Enon  for 
no  other  reason  than  that  there  was  much  water  there. 

Suppose,  for  example,  we  were  told  that  a  celebrated  mill- 
wright had  located  on  a  certain  creek  because  it  contained  much 
water,  who  would  more  honour  his  own  understanding,  he  that 
ajfirms  he  located  there  for  the  sake  of  watering  his  stock,  or  for 
the  sake  of  erecting  mills  ? 


160  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

As  to  the  location  of  Enon,  whether  it  were  north  of  John's 
first  location,  some  fifty  miles  up  the  river  Jordan,  or  whether 
it  was  a  stream  issuing  from  a  fountain  called  ^^Ainyon,  Doves- 
eye  Spring"  or  whether  it  was  a  5MW-fountain,  near  Salim,  vene- 
rated by  the  old  Canaanites,  are  questions  I  have  neither  leisure 
nor  inclination  to  discuss.  Robinson,  in  his  History  of  Baptism, 
discusses  such  questions  at  great  length.  I  refer  the  curious  to 
him,  and  will  only  give  a  short  extract  from  his  work  on  the 
use  of  the  words  polla  hudaia : 

"  It  is  observable,  that  the  rivers  Euphrates  at  Babylon,  Tiber 
at  Rome,  and  Jordan  in  Palestine  are  all  described  by  2)olla  liu- 
data.  Jeremiah  speaks  of  the  first,  and,  addressing  Babylon, 
says,  '  0  thou  that  dwellest  upon  many  waters,  thine  end  is 
come  ;'  for  Babylon  was  situated  on  what  the  Jews  called  tlie 
river,  the  great  river  Euphrates.  The  Evangelist  John  describes 
Rome,  which  was  built  on  the  Tiber,  by  saying,  '  The  great  har- 
lot, the  great  city  which  reigneth  over  the  kings  of  the  earth, 
sitteth  upon  many  loaters.'  Ezekiel  describes  Judea  and  Jordan, 
by  saying  to  the  princes  of  Israel,  '  Your  mother  is  a  lioness,  her 
whelps  devour  men,  she  was  fruitful  by  reason  of  many  icaters;' 
an  evident  allusion  to  the  lions  that  lay  in  the  thickets  of  Jor- 
dan. The  thunder  which  agitates  clouds,  charged  with  floods, 
is  called  the  voice  of  the  Lord  upon  many  waters:  and  the 
attachment  that  no  mortification  can  annihilate,  is  a  love  which 
many  waters  cannot  quench,  neither  can  the  floods  drown. 
How  it  comes  to  pass  that  a  mode  of  speaking,  which  on  every 
other  occasion  signifies  inuch,  should  in  the  case  of  baptism  sig- 
nify little,  is  a  question  not  easy  to  answer." 

To  an  unsophisticated  mind,  this  passage,  together  with  the 
Tarious  locations  of  John  along  the  Jordan,  sometimes  on  this 
side,  and  sometimes  on  that  side,  methinks,  independent  of 
every  other  argument,  would  refute  the  notion  of  sprinkling. 
But  how  much  more,  when  the  meaning  of  the  word  and  the 
laws  of  construction,  already  established,  assert  that  John's 
disciples  were  immersed  in  the  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins  ! 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  161 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Argument  9. — Apostolic  allusions  to  Baptism. 

Our  ninth  argument  in  proof  of  Proposition  I.  is  drawn  from 
the  apostolic  allusions  to  baptism.  In  Rom.  vi.  4,  baptism  is  re- 
ferred to  as  a  burial  and  a  resurrection.     See  also  in  Col.  ii. 

These  passages  read  as  follows:  "Know  you  not,  that  so 
many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ  were  baptized 
into  his  death?  Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism 
into  death  ;  that  like  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead,  we 
also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been 
planted  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the  like- 
ness of  his  resurrection."  Rom.  vi.  3-5.  Again  says  Paul, 
"Buried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein  also  you  are  risen  with 
him,  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who  hath  raised 
him  from  the  dead."  Col.  ii.  15. 

Notwithstanding  Prof.  M.  Stuart  has  spiritualized  away  any 
allusion  to  immersion  in  these  passages,  and  has  been  followed 
by  all  that  class  of  our  American  clergy  who  regard  him  as  one 
of  the  ablest  and  most  orthodox  of  commentators  ;  and,  notwith- 
standing some  one  or  two  others,  who  are  the  centres  of  inferior 
systems,  concur  with  him ; — still  I  would  be  willing  to  have 
these  passages  interpreted  by  Presbyterian,  Episcopalian,  and 
other  doctors  of  Pedobaptism.  Beginning  with  Calvin  and  end- 
ing with  the  greatest  oracle  in  all  the  Presbyterian  ranks,  in 
Britain  or  America,  for  once,  I  believe  I  shall  deliver  up  this 
passage  into  their  hands,  without  note  or  comment. 

Calvin :  "J.re  you  ignorant.  The  apostle  proves  that  Christ 
destroys  sin  in  his  people  from  the  effect  of  baptism,  by  which 
we  are  initiated  into  the  faith  of  the  Messiah.  For  we,  without 
controversy,  put  on  Christ  in  baptism,  and  are  baptized  on  this 
condition,  that  we  may  be  one  with  him.  Paul  thus  assumes 
another  principle,  that  we  may  then  truly  grow  into  the  body  of 
Christ  when  his  death  produces  its  own  fruit  in  us  who  believe. 
Nay,  he  teaches  us  that  this  fellowship  of  his  death  is  chiefly  to 
be  regarded  in  baptism,  for  washing  alone  is  not  proposed  in 
this  initiatory  ordinance,  but  mortification,  and  the  death  of  the 
old  man ;  whence  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  death  shows  itself  from 
the  moment  we  are  received  into  his  grace." 

14* 


162  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

Barnes:  "Tlierefore  we  are  buried,  &c.  It  is  altogether  pro- 
bable that  the  apostle  in  this  place  had  allusion  to  the  custom 
of  baptizing  by  immersion.  This  cannot,  indeed,  be  proved,  so 
as  to  be  liable  to  no  objection ;  but  I  presume  that  this  is  the 
idea  that  would  strike  the  great  mass  of  unprejudiced  readers/' 

Locke :  "We  did  own  some  kind  of  death  by  being  buried  un- 
der the  water,  which,  being  buried  with  him,  i.  e.  in  conformity  to 
his  burial,  as  a  confession  of  our  being  dead,  was  to  signify  that, 
as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  into  a  glorious  life  with 
his  Father,  even  so  we,  being  raised  from  our  typical  death  and 
burial  in  baptism,  should  lead  a  new  sort  of  life,  wholly  different 
from  our  former,  in  some  approaches  towards  that  heavenly  life 
that  Christ  is  risen  to." 

Wall :  "As  to  the  manner  of  baptism  then  generally  used,  the 
texts  produced  by  every  one  that  speaks  of  these  matters,  John 
iii.  23,  Mark  i.  5,  Acts  viii.  38,  are  undeniable  proofs  that  the 
baptized  person  went  ordinarily  into  the  water,  and  sometimes 
the  baptist  too.  We  should  not  know  from  these  accounts 
whether  the  whole  body  of  the  baptized  was  put  under  water, 
head  and  all,  were  it  not  for  the  two  later  proofs,  which  seem  to 
me  to  PUT  IT  OUT  of  question  :  One,  that  St.  Paul  does  twice,  in 
an  allusive  way  of  speaking,  call  baptism  a  burial ;  the  other,  the 
customs  of  the  Christians,  in  the  near  succeeding  times,  which, 
being  more  largely  and  particularly  delivered  in  books,  is  known, 
to  have  been  generally,  or  ordinarily,  a  total  immersion." 

Archbishop  Tillotson:  "Anciently,  those  who  were  baptized 
were  immersed  and  buried  in  the  water,  to  represent  their  death 
to  sin  ;  and  then  did  rise  up  out  of  the  water,  to  signify  their 
entrance  upon  a  new  life.  And  to  these  customs  the  apostle 
alludes,  Rom.  vi.  2-5." 

Archbishop  Seeker:  "Burying,  as  it  were,  the  person  bap- 
tized in  the  water,  and  raising  him  out  again,  without  question, 
was  anciently  the  more  usual  method ;  on  account  of  which  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  baptism  as  representing  both  the  death,  burial, 
and  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  what  is  grounded  on  them, — our 
being  dead  and  buried  to  sin,  and  our  rising  again  to  walk  in 
newness  of  life." 

Sam.  Clarke:  "TFe  are  buried  with  Christ  in  ba2)tism,  &c.  In 
the  primitive  times,  the  manner  of  baptizing  was  by  immersion, 
or  dipping  the  whole  body  into  the  water.  And  this  manner  of 
doing  it  was  a  very  significant  emblem  of  the  dying  and  rising 
again,  referred  to  by  St.  Paul,  in  the  above  mentioned  simili- 
tude." 

Wells:  "St.  Paul  here  alludes  to  immersion,  or  dipping  the 
whole  body  under  water  in  baptism ;  which,  he  intimates,  did 
typify  the  death  and  burial  (of  the  person  baptized)  to  sin,  and 
his  rising  up  out  of  the  water  did  typify  his  resurrection  to  new- 
ness of  life." 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  16S 

Bishop  Nicholson:  "In  the  grave  with  Christ  we  went  not; 
for  our  bodies  were  not,  could  not  be  buried  with  his  ;  but 
in  baptism,  by  a  kind  of  analogy  or  resemblance,  while  our 
bodies  are  under  the  water,  we  may  be  said  to  be  buried  with 
him.'' 

Doddridge :  ^'Surfed  ivith  him  in  baptism.  It  seems  the  part 
of  candour  to-  confess,  that  here  is  an  allusion  to  the  matter  of 
baptizing  by  immersion." 

George  Whitefield :  "  It  is  certain  that  in  the  words  of  our 
text,  Rom.  vi.  3,  4,  there  is  an  allusion  to  the  manner  of  baptism, 
which  was  by  immersion,  which  is  what  our  own  church  al- 
lows,''  &c. 

John  Wesley:  '^Buried  with  him — alluding  to  the  ancient 
manner  of  baptizing  by  immersion." 

Whitby :  *'  It  being  so  expressly  declared  here,  Eom.  vi.  4, 
and  Col.  ii.  12,  that  we  are  buried  with  Christ  in  baptism,  by 
being  buried  under  water ;  and  the  argument  to  oblige  us  to  a 
conformity  to  his  death,  by  dying  to  sin,  being  taken  hence  ; 
and  this  immersion  being  religiously  observed  by  all  Christians 
for  thirteen  centuries,  and  approved  by  our  Church,  and  the 
change  of  it  into  sprinkling,  even  without  any  allowance  from 
the  author  of  this  institution,  or  any  licence  from  any  council  of 
the  church,  being  that  which  the  Romanist  still  urges  to  justify 
his  refusal  of  the  cup  to  the  laity ;  it  were  to  be  wished  that  this 
custom  might  be  again  of  general  use,  and  aspersion  only  per- 
mitted, as  of  old,  in  case  of  the  clinici,  or  in  present  danger  of 
death." 

Macknight :  "Planted  together  in  the  likeness  of  his  death.  The 
burying  of  Christ,  and  of  believers,  first  in  the  water  of  baptism 
and  afterwards  in  the  earth,  is  fitly  enough  compared  to  the 
planting  of  seeds  in  the  earth,  because  the  efiect,  in  both  cases, 
is  a  reviviscence  to  a  state  of  greater  perfection." 

Assembly  of  Divines :  '''If  we  have  been  planted  together,^ 
&c.  By  this  elegant  similitude,  the  apostle  represents  to  us, 
that,  as  a  plant  that  is  set  in  the  earth  lieth  as  dead  and  im- 
movable for  a  time,  but  after  springs  up  and  flourishes,  so 
Christ's  body  lay  dead  for  a  while  in  the  grave,  but  sprang  up 
and  flourished  in  his  resurrection ;  and  we  also,  when  we  are 
baptized,  are  buried,  as  it  were,  in  the  water  for  a  time,  but  after 
are  raised  up  to  newness  of  life." 

I  cannot  find  room  for  the  witnesses  which  I  could  accumu- 
late on  this  point.  Concurrent  with  these  are  Grotius,  Beza, 
Bloomfield,  Koppe,  RosenmuUer,  &c.  I  will  conclude  this  vene- 
rable, learned,  and  highly  authoritative  list,  with  the  most  dis- 
tinguished Presbyterian  preacher  of  our  day.  In  the  recent 
"  Lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,"  the  justly  honoured 


164  ACTION   OP   BAPTISM. 

Thomas  Chalmers,  B.  D.  and  LL.  D.,  boldly  and  independently 
thus  expresses  himself,  on  chap.  vi.  4 : — 

"  The  original  meaning  of  the  word  baptism  is  immersion ; 
and,  though  we  regard  it  as  a  point  of  indifferency,  whether  the 
ordinance  so  named  be  performed  in  this  way  or  by  sprinkling — 
yet  we  doubt  not  that  the  prevalent  style  of  the  administration 
in  the  apostles'  days  was  by  an  actual  submerging  of  the  whole 
body  under  water.  We  advert  to  this  for  the  purpose  of  throw- 
ing light  on  the  analogy  that  is  instituted  in  these  verses.  Jesus 
Christ,  by  death,  underwent  this  sort  of  baptism  by  an  immersion 
under  the  surface  of  the  ground,  whence  he  soon  emerged  again 
by  his  resurrection.  We,  by  being  baptized  into  his  death,  are  con- 
ceived to  have  made  a  similar  translation.  In  the  act  of  descend- 
ing under  the  water  of  baptism  to  have  resigned  an  old  life,  and 
in  the  act  of  ascending  to  emerge  into  a  second  or  a  new  life — 
along  the  course  of  which  it  is  our  part  to  maintain  a  strenuous 
avoidance  of  that  sin  which  as  good  as  expunged  the  being  that 
we  had  formerly  ;  and  a  strenuous  prosecution  of  that  holiness 
which  should  begin  with  the  first  moment  that  we  were  ushered 
into  our  present  being,  and  be  perpetuated  and  made  progress 
toward  the  perfection  of  full  and  ripened  immortality." 

This  is  one  of  the  best  arguments  for  universal  consumption. 
All  do  not, — all  cannot  understand  Greek  criticism.  But  when 
Paul  explains  baptism  thus  allusively,  by  comparing  it  with  a 
burial  and  a  planting,  (as  seeds  in  the  same  bed — for  so  sunpliu- 
toi  intimates,)  all  plain,  common-sense  men  can  fully  appreciate 
how  the  Apostle  understood  the  matter.  I  have  given  no  com- 
ment of  my  own  on  Rom.  vi.  4;  Col.  ii.  12.  I  have  given  one 
wholly  from  the  other  side.  I  will  only  say,  that  when  any  of 
the  Liliputians  of  the  present  day  preach  against  this  view  of 
Rom.  vi.,  it  might  be  a  good  argument  to  their  modesty  to  re- 
mind them  of  what  Calvin  and  this  host,  down  to  Chalmers, 
have  said. 

After  hearing  these  (certainly  to  us)  impartial  witnesses,  it 
might  be  gratifying  to  some  Pedobaptists  to  hear  one  of  the 
most  reckless,  daring,  and  consequential  of  American  doctors 
*' assure"  his  people,  that  their  sprinkling  is  just  the  very  thing 
that  ought  to  satisfy  them.     Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton  says : — 

^  **  I  am  aware,  indeed,  that  our  Baptist  brethren,  as  before  in- 
timated, believe,  and  confidently  assert,  that  the  only  legitimate 
and  authorized  meaning  of  this  word  is  to  immerse ;  and  that  it 
is  never  employed,  in  a  single  case,  in  any  part  of  the  Bible,  to 
express  the  application  of  water  in  any  other  manner.  lean  ven- 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.    .  165 

iure,  my  friends,  to  assur-e  you,  with  the  utmost  confidence,  that 
this  representation  is  wholly  incorrect.  I  can  assure  you,  that 
the  word  which  we  render  baptize  does  legitimately  signify  the 
application  of  water  in  any  way,  as  well  as  by  immersion.  Nay, 
I  can  assure  you,  if  the  most  mature  and  competent  Greek  scho- 
lars that  ever  lived  may  be  allowed  to  decide  in  this  case,  that 
many  examples  of  the  use  of  this  word  occur  in  Scripture,  in 
which  it  not  only  may,  but  manifestly  must  signify  sprinkling, 
perfusion,  or  washing  in  any  way. 

"Now,  we  contend  that  this  word  does  not  necessarily,  nor 
even  commonly,  signify  to  immerse ;  but  also  implies  to  wash, 
to  sprinkle,  to  pour  on  water,  and  to  tinge  or  dye  with  any 
liquid ;  and,  therefore,  accords  very  well  with  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism by  sprinkling  or  aflfusion." 

I  am,  in  duty,  bound  to  say,  after  confronting  Prof.  Miller  of 
Princeton  with  this  mighty  host,  that  in  all  my  readings  on 
baptism,  and  they  are  not  meagre,  I  have  not  met  with  any 
writer  of  any  pretensions,  so  regardless  of  his  own  character 
for  learning,  for  skill  in  criticism,  for  knowledge  of  language, 
for  a  strict  regard  to  truth,  for  historical  accuracy,  whether 
on  the  subject  or  action  of  baptism,  as  this  said  Dr.  Miller 
of  Princeton.  His  little  book  on  baptism  is  really  one  of  the 
weakest,  most  puerile,  most  ill-natured,  uncandid  performances 
I  have  ever  read; — the  most  unworthy  performance  for  any  pro- 
fessor in  a  theological  school,  in  a  denomination  aspiring  after 
literary  eminence,  that  can  well  be  found  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. I  make  no  comments  on  the  passages  above  quoted.  I 
simply  place  them  in  contrast  with  his  own  Calvin,  and  all 
between  him  and  his  Scotch  brother,  Chalmers.  The  contrast 
alone  is  enough  for  one  lesson. 


166  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  X. 

Argument  10. — Passages  urged  against  immersion  from  the  use  of  hap- 
tizo  and  haptismos  in  certain  places. 

Mr  tenth  argument  shall  be  deduced  from  those  passages 
which  Pedobaptists  usually  urge  against  baptizo  and  baptismal 
as  not  indicating  immersion.  The  very  passages  which  they 
quote  against  our  views,  together  with  their  efforts  at  explaining 
them  away,  greatly  confirm  and  establish  our  conclusions.  We 
shall  commence  with  Mark  vii.  3,  4,  and  Luke  xi.  38  :  Except 
they  wash  their  hands  oft,  eat  not.  And  when  they  come  from 
market,  except  they  wash  [baptisoontai)  they  eat  not.  And 
many  such  things  they  hold,  as  the  washings  [baptismous)  of 
cups,  pots,  brazen  vessels,  and  beds  (or  couches).  Luke  xi.  38: 
The  Pharisees  wondered  that  Jesus  had  not  washed  {ebaptisthe) 
"before  dinner. 

These  washings  before  dinner,  reported  by  Mark  and  Luke, 
contain  the  only  two  instances  in  which  any  part  of  baptizo  ia 
ever  translated  by  wash,  in  the  New  Testament.  And,  fortu- 
nately, the  antithesis  between  the  washings  here  mentioned, 
indicated  by  the  words  employed  in  the  original,  and  the  facts 
Btated,  not  only  does  not  sustain  the  common  version  in  trans- 
lating both  words  by  the  same  word,  wash;  but  clearly  inti- 
mates that  the  latter  term,  baptizo,  ought  here  to  have  been  ren- 
dered immerse.  In  verse  3d,  it  is  oiipto  with  pugmee,  a  word 
already  shown  to  mean  washing  the  hands,  face,  or  feet,  always 
when  applied  to  the  human  person.  This  is  true  in  every  case 
in  the  Bible.  Moreover,  it  has  pugmee,  the  fist,  in  construction 
with  it ;  that  is,  as  Lightfoot  and  others  interpret  it,  to  the 
wrist,  or  so  far  as  the  fist  extends.  When  the  hand  is  shut,  says 
Pollux,  as  quoted  by  Carson,  the  outside  is  called  p)ugmee* 
Now,  as  this  limits  the  first  washing,  the  second,  being  ex- 
pressed by  baptizo,  and  having  no  part  of  the  body  mentioned 
as  its  peculiar  regimen,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  Greeks, 
(and  the  Romans,  in  the  case  of  lavo,)  the  whole  body  is  meant. 
Hence,  they  dip  or  bathe  themselves  after  being  to  market; 
whereas,  ordinarily,  they  wash  their  hands  only  up  to  the  wrist. 

*  rage  102. 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  167 

Both  Campbell  and  Macknight*  translated  the  word  in  this 
passage,  immerse.  Some  of  our  lexicons,  such  as  Schleusner's, 
Scapula's,  Stokius's,  &c.,  quote  this  passage  in  proof  that  wash- 
ing is  sometimes  the  effect  of  immersion.  The  meaning  of  hap^ 
tisoontai,  here,  as  in  Luke  xi.  38,  being  thus  clearly  indicated, 
(for  Luke  speaks  of  the  same  custom  as  Mark,)  we  have,  then, 
found  haptizo,  in  its  eighty  occurrences  in  the  New  Testament, 
uniformly  signifying  immersion ;  and  never  sprinkling  nor  pour- 
ing. 

Baptismos  is  also  translated  washing,  in  Heb.  ix.  2,  as  well  as 
in  Mark  vii.  4.  The  diverse  washings  of  cups,  pots,  brazen  ves- 
sels, tables,  couches,  persons,  and  things  mentioned  among  the 
traditions  of  the  elders  and  the  institutions  of  the  law,  were  for 
ceremonial  cleansing.  Hence,  all  by  immersion ;  inasmuch  as 
nothing  was  ever  cleansed,  since  the  world  began,  by  sprinkling 
water  upon  it.  Meantime,  I  assume  this  fact,  but  I  will  hereafter 
demonstrate  it: — Macknight  and  Campbell  were  much  more 
learned  in  the  true  meaning  of  this  word  than  the  whole  college 
of  the  king's  translators.  Macknight  translates  the  ''diverse 
washings^'  of  the  common  version  by  ''diverse  immersions,'* 
Heb.  ix.  2. 

Baptismos  is  never  applied  to  the  Christian  ordinance, — hap- 
iisma  generally ;  and,  therefore,  our  translators  never  translated 
the  latter  but  by  baptism,  and  baptismos  three  times  by  wash- 
ing. We  have,  then,  in  one  hundred  and  twenty  occurrences 
of  haptizo,  baptismos,  baptisma,  and  baptistees,  not  found  a  single 
exception. 

But  we  find  bapto,  in  Daniel,  in  some  of  its  flexions,  twice 
translated  ivet;  and  that,  too,  by  the  dew  of  heaven  !  It  was, 
then,  a  general  wetting — profuse  as  immersion ;  and  this  me- 
tonymy, of  the  effect  for  the  cause,  clearly  indicates  that  in  the 
days  of  the  Septuagint,  the  idea  of  sprinkling  was  never  asso- 
ciated with  bapto.  Dews  are  more  wetting  in  this  country, — 
much  more  so  in  Asia,  in  the  environs  of  the  Euphrates, — than 
any  Pedobaptist  sprinkling  since  the  council  of  Ravenna.  Soak- 
ing, wetting,  dyeing,  colouring,  and  even  washing,  it  has  always 
been  conceded,  are  frequent  meanings  of  bapto  ;  because,  as  all 
the  dictionaries  explain,  these  processes  are  accomplished  by 
immersing.   Indeed,  these  metaphors  all  go  to  show  that  immer- 

*  Macknight's  Harmony  of  the  Four  Gospels,  Mark  vii. 


168  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

sion  was  the  proper  and  fixed  meaning  of  the  term ;  for,  unless 
things  were  covered  in  some  way,  they  could  neither  he  dyed, 
coloured,  washed,  soaked,  or  even  thoroughly  wet. 

But  it  is  frequently  urged,  with  great  vehemence,  that  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Spirit,  promised  in  the  "New  Testament,  was 
said  to  be  accomplished  by  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit ;  and, 
hence,  pouring  is  the  true  baptism  1  This  passes  for  conclusive 
logic  with  thousands ;  and  yet  nothing  is  much  more  prepos- 
terous. There  can,  possibly,  be  no  analogy  between  the  pour- 
ing of  water  and  the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit.  There  is  no 
resemblance  between  the  Spirit  and  water;  and,  consequently, 
there  can  be  none  in  the  pouring  of  them  out.  But  the  Spirit 
of  God  is  compared  to  a  well  of  water  springing  up  within  us. 
Is  that  baptism,  by  the  force  of  comparison  ?  If  so,  the  Spirit 
is  compared  to  the.  wind  blowing;  and  it  is  compared  to  a  per- 
son breathing  upon  another,  &c.  Shall  we,  then,  say  that  any, 
or  all  of  these,  are  supposed  to  resemble  baptism  ?  Many  other 
such  phrases  there  are ;  and,  certainly  there  is  as  much  pro- 
priety in  supposing  that  breathing,  blowing,  or  springing  np  are 
quite  as  analogous  to  baptism  as  pouring  out ;  and  that,  if  pour- 
ing be  baptism,  then  are  breathing,  blowing,  and  springing  up, 
baptism ! ! 

But  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  is  never  called  baptism.  It  is, 
strictly,  the  preparation  for  it ;  just  as  the  tanner  or  the  fuller 
pours  out  water  into  his  vat,  in  order  to  prepare  for  immersing 
into  it  the  subjects  of  these  processes.  So  God  poured  out  the 
gifts  of  the  Spirit  most  copiously  on  Pentecost,  that  the  disci- 
ples might  be  subjected  to,  or  immersed  in,  all  these  influences ! 
Such  is  my  understanding  of  a  very  bold  metaphor.  But,  as  I 
am  so  fond  of  Pedobaptist  authority,  I  shall  show  that  some  of 
the  most  learned  of  them  are  with  us  here  also. 

I  find  a  rich  cluster  of  these  Pedobaptist  grapes,  just  ready 
to  my  hand,  in  Booth's  Reply  to  Dr.  Williams ;  and  I  will  just 
transfer  it,  leaves  and  all,  to  my  page. 

Gurtlerus:  "  Baptism  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  immersion  into  the 
pure  waters  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  or  a  rich  and  abundant  com- 
munication of  his  gifts.  For  he  on  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
poured  out,  is,  as  it  were,  immersed  into  him." 

Bp.  Reynolds :  "  The  Spirit,  under  the  gospel,  is  compared— 
to  water :  and  that  not  a  little  measure,  to  sprinkle,  or  bedew, 
tut  to  BAPTIZE  the  fiiithful  in,  (Matt.  iii.  11;  Acts  i.  5;)  and 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  169 

that  not  in  a  font,  or  vessel,  which  grows  less  and  less,  "but  in  a 

spring,  or  living  river." 

Ikenius :  "The  Greek  word,  hapiismos,  denotes  the  immersion 
of  a  thing,  or  a  person,  into  something.  Here,  also,  [Matt.  iii. 
11,  compared  with  Luke  iii.  16,]  the  baptism  of  jire,  or  that 
which  is  performed  injire,  must  signify,  according  to  the  same 
simplicity  of  the  letter,  an  immission,  or  immersion,  into  fire — 
and  this  the  rather,  because  here,  to  baptize  in  tlie  SpiHt  and  in 
Jire  are  not  only  not  connected,  but  also  opposed  to  being  bap- 
tized in  loaterJ" 

Le  Clerc:  "fie  sJiall  baptize  you  in  tlie  Holy  Spirit.  As  I 
plunge  you  in  water,  he  shall  plunge  you,  so  to  speak,  in  the 
Holy  Spirit." 

Casaubon :  "  To  baptize  is  to  immerse — and  in  this  sense  th«* 
apostles  are  truly  said  to  be  baptized ;  for  the  house  in  which 
this  was  done  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  so  that  the  apos- 
tles seemed  to  be  plunged  into  it,  as  into  a  fish-pool." 

Grotius :  "  To  be  baptized,  here,  is  not  to  be  slightly  sprinkled ; 
but  to  have  the  Holy  Spirit  abundantly  poured  upon  them." 

Mr.  Leigh :  "  Baptized ;  that  is,  drown  you  all  over,  dip  you 
into  the  ocean  of  his  grace  ;  opposite  to  the  sprinkling  which 
was  in  the  law." 

Abp.  Tillotson:  ^'It  [the  sound  from  heaven.  Acts  ii.  2'\JiJUd 
all  the  house.  This  is  that  which  our  Saviour  calls  baptizing 
with  the  Holy  Ghost.  So  that  they  who  sat  in  the  house  were, 
as  it  were,  immersed  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  they  who  were 
buried  with  water,  were  overwhelmed  and  covered  all  over  with 
water,  which  is  the  proper  notion  of  baptism." 

Bp.  Hopkins :  "  Those  that  are  baptized  with  the  Spirit  are, 
as  it  were,  plunged  into  that  heavenly  flame,  whose  searching 
energy  devours  all  their  dross,  tin,  and  base  alloy." 

Mr.  H.  Dodwell :  "  The  words  of  our  Saviour  were  made  good. 
Ye  shall  be  baptized  (plunged  or  covered)  with  the  Holy  Spirit, 
as  John  baptized  with  water,  without  it." 

"  Thus  modern  Pedobaptists  who  practised  pouring  or  sprink- 
ling. Let  us  now  hear  one  of  the  ancients,  who  wrote  in  the 
Greek  language  and  practised  immersion.  Cyril,  of  Jerusalem, 
who  lived  in  the  fourth  century,  speaks  in  the  following  man- 
mer: — 'As  he  who  is  plunged  in  water  and  baptized,  is  encom- 
passed by  the  water  on  every  side,  so  are  they  that  are  wholly 
baptized  by  the  Spirit.  There  [under  the  Mosaic  economy]  the 
servants  of  God  were  partakers  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  but  here 
they  were  perfectly  baptized,  or  immersed  of  him.'  These  tes- 
timonies are  quite  sujficient,  one  would  imagine,  to  vindicate  our 
sense  of  the  term  baptize,  when  used  allusively  with  reference  to 
the  gifts  and  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

If,  then,  so  many  learned  Pedobaptists  can  themselves  recon- 

16 


170  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

cile  this  style  to  immersion,  why  should  any  of  them  complain 
of  our  so  attempting?  One  question  more.  If  baptism  be 
pouring,  why  do  they  sprinJde  ?  Are  pouring  and  sprinkling 
the  same  action  ?_ 

But  I  have  yet  another  objection  from  which  an  argument 
may  be  drawn: — "Arise,  and  be  baptized,  Saul,  said  Ananias; 
and  Saul  arose  and  was  baptized."  A  clear  proof  that  Paul 
was  baptized  standing ;  consequently,  not  immersed !  \ 

In  Luke's  writings  alone,  we  have  this  idiom  eight  times — 
Anastas,  with  an  imperative  immediately  following,  and  without 
a  conjunction  or  a  comma,  is  found  in  Luke  xvii.  19  ;  xxii.  46 ; 
Acts  ix.  11 ;  X.  13,  20 ;  xi.  7 ;  xxii.  10,  16.  In  every  instance, 
it  indicates  a  divine  command  from  the  Lord  in  person,  or  from 
a  supernatural  agent  acting  for  him.  Nothing  expressed  by  the 
term  lise,  different  from  the  action  to  be  performed.  In  no  in- 
stance does  the  precept  arise  terminate  the  action.  It  never 
means  two  actions  in  any  one  case.  It  is  not  arise  and  be  bap- 
tized.    It  is  an  idiom  of  expressing  one  immediate  action. 

The  idiom  always  changes  when  an  action  different  from 
rising  up  is  intended.  Another  imperative  form,  with  a  copula- 
tive of  some  kind,  intimates  two  actions :  Acts  viii.  26 ;  ix.  6, 
34 ;  xxvi.  16.  In  all  these  it  is  anasteethi,  followed  by  a  copu- 
lative, rise  and  stand  upon  thy  feet,  rise  and  go  into  the  city, 
&c.  In  these  last  cases,  there  is  something  more  than  mere 
earnestness  and  authority  expressed.  There  are  two  distinct 
imperatives:  do  this  and  do  that.  But  anastas poreiiouo  is  quite 
a  different  idiom.  In  this  case,  rising  is  no  more  than  an  ad- 
junct. It  is  not  a  distinct  precept ;  therefore,  it  is  never  ren- 
dered stand  up. 

Almost  every  orator,  indeed,  in  a  persuasive  and  exhortatory 
address,  in  our  language,  uses  the  term  rise  when  an  erect  posi- 
tion or  a  mere  change  of  position  is  never  thouglit  of.  In  this 
way,  it  is  used  ten  times  for  one  in  any  other  sense,  especially 
in  warm  and  ardent  appeals  : — Rise,  citizens  ! — rise,  sinners  ! — 
rise,  men  and  let  us  do  our  duty.  In  this  common  sense  import 
of  the  term  did  Ananias  address  Paul. 

From  the  whole  premises,  I  argue  that  if  Ananias  intended  to 
sprinkle  Paul,  he  would  not  have  commanded  him  to  rise  and  bo 
baptized.  For  immersion,  he  must  go  to  the  water ;  for  sprink- 
ling, the  water  could  liave  been  brought  to  him.  The  efforts 
made  by  some  Pcdobaptists  to  make  it  appear  from  this  passage 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  171 

that  Paul  was  baptized  standing  up  are  alike  indicative  of  their 
humble  attainments  in  Greek  literature,  as  well  as  of  the  invete- 
racy of  their  prejudices.  No  man,  so  far  as  known  to  me,  of 
any  eminence  for  Greek  literature,  has  ever  made  such  an  at- 
tempt. When  all  the  objections  against  immersion  are  consi- 
dered, one  by  one,  we  may  conclude,  with  Professor  Stuart — 

*'  For  myself,  then,  I  cheerfully  admit,  that  bapiizo,  in  the 
New  Testament,  when  applied  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  does  in  all 
probability  involve  the  idea  that  this  rite  was  usually  performed 
by  immersion,  but  not  always." 

The  three  last  words,  "  but  not  alimijs/'  founded  on  such  pas- 
sages as  I  have  examined,  are  built  upon  too  slender  a  basis  for 
so  strong  a  man. 


CHAPTER  XL 

Argument  11. — Legal  Sprinklings. 

My  eleventh  argument  in  proof  of  the  proposition  before  us 
is  drawn  from  the  fact — that  sprinkling  and  pouring  mere 

WATER  ON  ANY  PERSON  OR  THING  FOR  ANY  MORAL,  CEREMONIAL,  OR 
religious  use,  was  NEVER  DONE  BY  THE   AUTHORITY  OF  GOD  SINCE 

THE  WORLD  BEGAN.  Let  DO  ouc  bc  startlcd  at  the  novelty  of  the 
announcement  of  this  fact.  I  am  aware  that  it  has  been  over- 
looked in  all  the  books  written  upon  the  subject,  and  in  all  the 
discussions  of  the  question  that  have  ever  fallen  under  my  ob- 
servation. It  is,  however,  on  that  account  no  less  true — no  less 
important.  In  truth,  if  this  point  be  established,  it  is  an  end  of 
the  controversy  among  Protestants.  If,  then,  I  sustain  this  fact, 
I  shall,  in  my  humble  opinion,  have  achieved  a  service  to  the 
cause  of  truth  of  paramount  importance.  It  will  put  an  end  to 
this  everlasting  strife  about  foreign  authorities,  Greek  verbs, 
nouns,  and  prepositions.  It  will  decide  the  wavering — it  will 
strengthen  the  weak — it  will  confound  opposition — it  will 
silence  every  demur.  Some  may,  in  the  first  instance,  laugh  at 
it ;  some  may  aifect  to  disparage  it ;  but  I  know  too  much  of  hu- 
man nature — of  the  conscientious — to  think  that  any  one  at  all 
interested  in  knowing  and  doing  the  Master's  will,  can  ever 


172  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

rest  satisfied  with  himself,  so  long  as  he  makes  light  of  such  a 
fact  as  that  now  before  us. 

The  law  of  Moses,  the  typical  dispensations,  the  ceremonial 
cleansings,  the  *'  diverse  washings,"  as  they  call  them,  once 
divinely  instituted,  have  never  yet  occupied  that  place  in  theolo- 
gical schools,  in  the  systems  of  public  instruction,  either  in  the 
congregation  or  in  the  halls  of  divinity,  that  they  merit.  An  in- 
timate knowledge  of  the  five  books  of  Moses  will  elucidate  the 
Christian  religion  more  fully  and  more  satisfactorily  than  all  the 
theological  libraries  in  Christendom,  in  the  absence  of  that 
knowledge. 

It  is,  indeed,  assumed  that  Christianity  is  a  sort  of  continua- 
tion of  Judaism  enlarged  and  improved,  without  its  bloody  rites, 
but  retaining  its  sprinklings  or  washings  with  water  as  a  sort 
of  refined  ceremonial — an  evangelico-legal  purification.  I  am 
sorry  to  see  that  ^^holy  water"  is  still  popular  with  more  than 
Roman  Catholics,  and  that  the  sprinklings  of  the  law  have 
been  mistaken  for  a  kind  of  holy  water  aspersions  and  ablutions. 

Mere  water,  I  again  assert,  was  never  sprinkled  on  man, 
woman,  or  child  by  any  divine  warrant  or  formulary,  under  any 
dispensation  of  religion,  Patriarchal,  Jewish,  or  Christian. 
Here,  then,  is  the  Law  and  the  Testimony.  Let  an  example  be 
produced. 

Blood  was  sprinkled,  and  water  mingled  with  blood,  or  with 
the  ashes  of  a  blood-red  heifer,  called  sometimes  clean  or  pure 
water,  a  contraction  for  "  the  water  of  purification,"  "  the  water 
of  separation,"  "the  water  of  cleansing."  And  strange  though 
it  may  appear,  some  commentators  have  wholly  misconceived 
the  phrase  clean  water,  not  discriminating  between  the  Gentile 
and  Jewish  sense  of  those  terms :  yet  to  confound  the  true  Lord 
with  the  "  lords  many"  of  Gentilism,  is  not  more  warrantable 
than  to  confound  "  clean  water"  with  water  free  from  any  fo- 
reign admixture.  Reference  can  be  had  to  every  passage  in  the 
Bible  on  this  subject.  I  have  examined  them  one  by  one  ;  and 
here  is  the  sum  of  them. 

Water  was  never  poured,  in  any  instance,  upon  a  human  be- 
ing in  virtue  of  any  statute,  law,  or  regulation  of  divine  au- 
thority, for  the  purpose  of  sanctifying,  purifying,  or  cleansing 
him  from  any  kind  of  legal,  ceremonial,  or  moral  pollution — for 
the  sake  of  healing  him  or  cleansing  him  from  any  malady, 
physical  or  mental.     Water  mingled  with  ashes  is  commanded 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  173 

to  be  sprinkled,  as  a  water  of  separation,  or  of  cleansing  per- 
sons polluted  by  any  contact  with  things  forbidden  or  declared 
unclean.  The  only  passages  in  the  Bible,  Old  Testament  or 
New,  in  which  this  subject  is  mentioned,  are — Num.  viii.  and 
7th:  "Sprinkle  water  of  purifying  [sin-water  in  the  margin] 
upon  them,  [the  Levites,]  and  let  them  shave  all  their  flesh,  and 
let  them  wash  their  clothes  and  make  themselves  clean.'' 
Again,  Num.  xix.  13th,  18th,  19th,  and  21st  verses.  The  manu- 
facture of  this  "sin-water,"  or  water  of  purification — the  law 
of  the  red  heifer  without  spot,  and  the  preparation  of  her  ashes, 
and  the  manner  of  them,  are  detailed  in  this  chapter.  These 
four  passages  are  the  only  passages  in  the  law  of  Moses  that 
speak  of  sprinkling  water.  Allusion  to  this  "  clean''  or  "  cleans- 
ing water"  is  found  once,  and  only  once  in  the  Prophets — 
"  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you."  Ezekiel  xsxvi. 
25.^ 

In  the  New  Testament,  we  find  the  term  "  sprinkle"  only 
seven  times.  Heb.  ix.  19,  21,  "  Moses  sprinkled  both  the  book 
and  all  the  people  with  blood."  Heb.  x.  22,  "  Having  our 
hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience,  and  our  bodies  washed 
with  pure  water."  In  Heb.  ix.  12,  we  have  an  allusion  to  the 
red  heifer:  "The  ashes  of  an  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean." 
Heb.  xi.  28  also  affords  another  instance:  "Moses  kept  the 
sprinkling  of  blood."  And  Heb.  xii.  24  alludes  to  the  "  blood 
sprinkling."  While  Peter,  in  his  1st  Epistle,  i.  2,  alludes  to 
the  sprinkling  of  Christ's  blood.  So  that  sprinkling  of  water 
receives  no  countenance  whatever  from  the  New  Testament. 

We  have,  indeed,  diverse  bathings  in  water  alone,  though  no 


*  I  have  left  out  one  occurrence  of  the  word  sprinlie,  because  of  its  doubtful  in- 
terpretation. It  is  found  Isaiah  Hi.  15:  "  So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."  Ju- 
nius and  Tremellius,  for  whose  learning  and  general  critical  acumen  in  their  Latin 
version,  lying  before  me,  London  edition,  1581, 1  have  a  high  respect,  thus  render 
it : — Ita  persperget  stupore  gcntes  multas — "  So  shall  he  astonish  (sprinkle  with 
astonishment)  many  nations."  The  Septuagint  uses  thaumasontai — "  So  shall  he  as- 
tonish many  nations."  And  in  the  five  other  versions  of  Bagster's  Hexapla,  equi- 
valent terms  are  employed.  Adam  Clark  observes  on  this  passage  :  "I  retain  the 
common  rendering,  though  I  am  by  no  means  satisfied  with  it.  Tazzeh,  frequent 
in  the  law,  means  only  to  sprinkle  ;  but  the  water  sprinkled  is  the  accusative  case, 
the  thing  on  which  has  al  or  el.  Thaumasontai  makes  the  best  apoclosis."  So  think 
I.  The  connection  would  be  more  consistent.  "  So  shall  he  astonish  many  nations." 
"The  kings  shall  shut  their  mouth  at  him."  But  Lowth  has  it,  "So  shall  he 
sprinkle  with  his  blood  many  nations."  So  far  as  my  position  is  concerned,  any 
translation  is  equal. 

15* 


174  ACTION   OF   BAPTISM. 

sprinkling  of  water  alone,  in  the  Law.  In  Leviticus,  chapter  xv. 
verses  5,  8, 10,  11,  13,  16, 18,  21,  22,  27.  Here  are  ten  diverse 
bathings  in  one  chapter.  The  whole  flesh  is  said  to  be  bathed, 
or  the  whole  person  bathed,  in  order  to  cleansing. 

Also,  Lev.  xvi.  26,  28,  there  are  two  other  bathings  in  order 
to  cleansing — he  that  carried  off  the  scape-goat,  and  he  that 
burned  the  remains  of  the  offerings  of  the  great  day  of  atone- 
ment. In  Lev.  xvii.  15,  16,  another  bathing  of  the  person  and 
a  washing  of  the  clothes  for  purification.  In  Num.  also,  xix. 
7,  8,  19,  we  have  three  other  bathings  in  order  to  cleansing.  In 
all,  we  have  sixteen  distinct  bathings  mentioned  in  order  to  pu- 
rification. These  washings  or  bathings  are  uniformly  expressed 
by  louo,  and  contrasted  with  pourings  and  sprinklings.  How 
the  bathing  was  accomplished  we  are  not  told,  only  that  it  was 
not  done  by  sprinkling  nor  pouring.  These  are  therefore  called 
by  Paul  "  diverse  baptisms,"  or  baptisms  on  diverse  occasions. 

How  any  man  of  the  learning  of  Professor  Stuart,  and  his 
critical  discrimination,  could  have .  overlooked  the  fact  that 
sprinklings  are  never  alluded  to  in  these  diverse  bathings  re- 
ported by  Moses,  but  in  fact  are  sometimes  placed  in  antithesis 
with  them,  is  a  singular  oversight,  attributable,  I  presume,  to 
his  taking  for  granted  that  the  diverse  washings  of  Paul  might 
cover  the  whole  ground  of  Jewish  ablutions.  But  this  most 
clearly  is  not  the  fact.* 

*  In  alluding  to  the  learning  and  candour  of  Professor  Stuart,  of  Andover,  for 
both  of  which  I  cherish  a  very  high  respect,  I  would  not  be  understood  as  at  all 
regarding  either  as  perfect.  His  elaborate  essay  on  Baptism  is  frequently  defective 
in  candour,  and  is  not  wholly  exempt  from  errors  and  imperfections  in  a  literary 
point  of  view.  Some  of  these  have  alrea<ly  been  pointed  out  by  Messrs.  Judd  and 
Kipley  and  others.  lie  does  not  always  honour  his  own  rules  of  interpretation  by 
a  rigid  compliance  with  them.  A  few  specifications  are  all  that  we  have  room  for. 
The  rrofessor,  page  318  of  the  Biblical  Repository,  proposes  to  show  that  baptize 
Bometimes  intimates  copious  affusion  as  well  as  immersion  ;  but  never  gives,  in  all 
bis  elaborate  inductions,  a  single  example — because,  as  I  honestly  presume,  ho 
could  not. 

He  avers  that  classic  authors  usually  employ  ei's  after  baptize,  to  indicate  plung- 
ing, and  yet  he  translates  it  himself  plunge  without  eis,  and  fails  to  prove  the 
generality  of  the  usage. 

While  contending  that  eis  ton  Jordanee  (into  the  Jordan)  would  be  the  proper 
construction  after  baptizo,  if  immersion  were  intended, — on  finding  a  case  of  that 
Bort,  (Mark  1.  9,)  he  will  not  atlmit  it  to  be  a  full  evidence  of  immer.«ion.  In  fact, 
nothing  could  prove  to  him  that  it  crrtainly  was  the  primitive  practice;  although 
to  him  it  is  extremely  probable — almost  certain — wanting,  no  one  can  see,  how 
little  of  full  assurance.  He  seems  to  make  eis  with  an  accusative  denote  instru- 
mentality, a  case  unpreccdeuted  in  philology,  iu  rendering  eis  ton  Jordancen  wim 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.  175 

There  yet,  indeed,  remains  another  fact  of  much  significance 
and  authority  in  this  discussion,  and  which  still  farther  explodes 
the  notion  of  any  ablutions  being  performed  by  sprinkling  even 
the  water  of  purification  alone.     It  is  this,  that  no  one  legally 


THE  Jordan  ;  and  in  alleging  that  "  the  phrase  may  designate  the  element  with 
•which  John  performed  the  rite." 

At  another  time,  he  will  not  have  our  Lord  to  emerge  from  the  water  of  Jordan, 
neither  by  the  force  of  haptizo  nor  anahaino.  Immersion  does  not  imply  emer- 
sion, and  anabaino  does  not  anywhere  mean  to  emerge  or  escape  out  of  the  water, 
especially  in  the  New  Testament  usages.  "  As  to  emerging  out  of  water,"  says 
Mr.  Stuart,  "  I  can  find  no  such  meaning  attached  to  anabaino;"  yet,  as  Mr.  Judd 
has  shown,  it  is  so  found  repeatedly.  In  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  sec.  11,  "There 
was  a  river,  and  anabainen  ex  autou — and  out  of  it  rose  beautiful  trees."  And 
Matt.  xvi.  27,  "  Take  up  the  first  fish  that  cometh  up  out  of  the  sea" — anabanta. 
Also,  Rev.  xiii.  1,  "  I  saw  a  beast  rising  up  out  of  the  sea — e^-  tees  thalassees  ana- 
hainon — the  same  idiom  with  the  Septuagint,  when  the  witch  of  Endor  describes 
Saul  anabainonta  ek  tees  gees — ascending  out  of  the  earth ;  theous  anabainontas  ek 
tees  gees — gods  ascending  out  of  the  earth."  Judd's  Review,  page  49. 

With  Professor  Stuart,  apo  will  not  bring  a  person  out  of  a  liquid.  lie  has  found 
"no  place  where  it  is  applied  to  denote  a  movement  out  of  liquid  into  the  air." 
But  others  have  found  such  examples:  Homer  makes  Aurora  to  rise  up,  ap 
oJceanou,  II.  xix.  1.  A  fish,  in  Tobit  vi.  2  leaped  apo  tou  potamou,  from  the  river. 
It  is  therefore  a  clear  case,  as  Dr.  Campbell  long  since  proved,  that  anabaino  will 
represent  an  emerging  from  water.  Judd,  page  50.  Many  similar  defects  can  be 
collected  out  of  this  essay,  of  a  philological  character.  But  I  will  only  notice  a 
more  serious  imputation,— the  want  of  candour.   Take  the  following  for  example  :— 

"  He  supposes  that  katebesan  amphoteroi  eis  to  udor  does  neither  necessarily  nor 
probably  mean,  they  descended  into  the  water.  After  citing  several  examples  in 
proof  that  eis  means  to  or  towards,  in  every  one  of  which  it  most  clearly  signifies 
into,  he  remarks  on  the  verb,  "  that  when  one  analyzes  the  idea  of  Icatabainon, 
going  down,  descending,  he  finds  it  indicates  the  action  performed  before  reaching  a 
place,  the  approximation  to  it  by  descent,  and  not  the  entering  into  it ;  so  that 
whether  the  person  thus  going  doion,  eis  to  udor,  enters  into  it  or  not,  must  be 
designated  in  some  other  way  than  by  this  expression." 

This  is  just  as  conclusive  as  though  one  were  to  take  the  English  expression, 
they  descended  into  the  water,  and  contend  that  it  does  not  mean,  they  went  doivn 
into  the  water ;  because  when  one  analyzes  the  idea  of  descending,  he  finds  that  it 
indicates  the  action  performed  before  reaching  a  place,  approximation  to  it,  and  not 
the  entering  into  it.  It  is  not  pretended  that  the  verb  of  itself  expresses  entering 
into ;  but  if  katabaino,  to  descend,  in  connexion  with  eis,  into,  does  not  express  en- 
tering into,  I  ask,  what  phraseology  can  be  found  in  the  language  that  will  express 
it  ?  The  same  liberty  that  is  taken  with  Scripture,  in  frittering  away  its  meaning 
in  regard  to  baptism,  if  carried  through,  would  unsettle  at  once  the  most  import- 
ant doctrines  of  the  Bible,  annihilating  alike  the  hopes  of  the  righteous  and  the 
fears  of  the  wicked.  For  what  evidence  would  remain  to  us  that  the  latter  will 
at  last  go  a-w&y  into  everlasting  punishment,  or  the  former  mto  life  eternal?  It 
might  be  said,  with  just  as  much  propriety  in  the  one  case  as  the  other,  that  eis 
means  to  or  towards,  and  that  whether  the  righteous  are  actually  received  into 
heaven,  or  the  wicked  turned  into  hell,  must  be  designated  by  some  other  expression 
than  this.  But  such  an  unwarrantable  license  with  the  Scripture  cannot  fail  to 
receive  the  disapprobation  of  every  conscientious  reader. 


J76  ACTION   OF  BAPTISM. 

polluted,  ceremonially  unclean,  was  ever  cleansed,  even  by  the 
■water  of  purifying  itself.  They  had  all  to  be  bathed  or  im- 
mersed before  they  could  enter  into  the  congregation  or  the 
sanctuary  of  the  Lord. 

On  the  verity  and  correctness  of  these  statements  much,  very 
much,  depends.  If  they  are  as  reported,  and  that  they  assur- 
edly are,  where  has  sprinkling  water  any  authority  from  the 
Bible  ?  Has  it  any  countenance  from  the  Law  ?  Has  it  any 
from  the  Prophets  ?  Has  it  any  from  the  Apostles  and  Evan- 
gelists of  Jesus  Christ?  If  it  have,  who  will  name  the  passage? 
There  is  not  one,  from  Genesis  to  the  end  of  the  Apocalypse. 
Is  this  the  first  time  that  sprinkling  water  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  has  been  driven  out  of  the  Bible,  without  one  shadow  of 
countenance  from  any  rite,  ceremony,  or  ordinance.  Patriarchal, 
Jewish,  or  Christian?  That  these  legal  bathings  were  neither 
sprinklings  nor  pourings,  is  already  proved.  That  they  were 
immersions  is  very  obvious,  from  one  fact :  The  leprous  had 
always  to  bathe  himself  after  being  sprinkled  with  the  water 
of  separation.     Louo  is,  therefore,  always  used.     Now,  when 


"But,"  says  Professor  Stuart,  " I  have  another  remark  to  make  on  katehesan 
amphoteroi  eis  to  udor,  they  both  went  dc/wn  totJie  water.  This  is,  that  if  Jcatelesan 
eis  to  udor  is  meant  to  designate  the  action  of  j^lunging  or  being  immersed  into  the 
water,  as  a  part  of  the  rite  of  baptism,  then  was  Philip  baptized  as  well  as  the 
eunuch;  for  the  sacred  writer  says  that  botu  went  into  the  water.  Here  then  must 
have  been  a  robaptism  of  Philip ;  and,  what  is  at  least  singular,  he  must  have  bap- 
tized himself,  as  well  as  the  eunuch.  All  these  considerations  together  show,  that 
the  going  down  to  the  water,  and  the  going  up  from  the  water,  constituted  no  part  of 
the  rite  of  baptism  itself;  for  Philip  did  the  one  and  the  other  just  as  truly  as  the 
eunuch."  I  had  little  expected  any  tbing  so  disingenuous  from  Professor  Stuart. 
There  is  neither  reason  nor  candour  in  the  remark.  It  is  egregious  trifling ;  and 
that,  too,  on  a  subject  where  we  had  reason  to  expect  at  least  common  sincerity 
and  fair  argument.  Who  supposes  that  the  walJdng  doion  into  the  water  is  meant 
to  indicate  the  action  of  plunging,  as  a  part  of  the  rite  of  baptism?  No  Baptist 
ever  suggest(!d  such  an  idea.  The  writer  says  they  went  down  both  into  the  ivatu; 
both  ridlip  and  the  eunuch;  and  he  baptized  him.  Here  were  two  distinct  actions  : 
the  first,  that  of  going  down  into  the  water,  in  which  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch 
■were  agents;  and  the  second,  that  of  baptism,  in  which  Philip  was  the  agent,  and 
the  eunuch  the  subject.  What  we  claim  is,  that  the  baptism  was  performed  in  the 
water,  subsequently  to  their  going  down  into  it,  and  previously  to  coming  up 
out  of  it;  and  this  circumstance  furnishes  strong  proof  of  immersion,  inasmuch  as 
it  is  incredible  that  Phili])  and  the  eunuch  would  both  have  gone  down  into  the 
water  merely  for  the  purpose  o( sprinlliitg."  Judd's  Review,  pp.  61,  62. 

It  gives  me  pain  rather  than  pleasure  to  (expose  tliese  frailties  of  one  so  deserved- 
ly eminent  in  yijlical  criticism.  Thoy  are  indeed  another  evidence  that  no  man 
can  fither  make  error  consistent  with  itself,  nor  liiinself  consistent  with  himselfi 
vihilii  at  ouo  time  reasouiug  with,  and  at  another  tiiuu  without,  bias. 


ACTION   OP  BAPTISM.  177 

Naaman,  the  Assyrian  leper,  came  to  Elisba  to  be  cleansed,  he 
commanded  him  to  bathe  {louo)  in  Jordan  seven  times.  He  uses 
the  same  word  found  in  the  case  of  the  leper.  How  this  word 
was  understood  may  be  learned  from  the  fact,  that  he  dipped 
himself  seven  times  in  the  Jordan.  According  to  all  the  evi- 
dence now  before  us,  and,  indeed,  from  all  that  is  written  in  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  Scriptures,  the  following  conclusions  are 
ascertained  facts : — That  upon  persons  and  things  blood  was 
sprinkled ;  on  the  human  person  or  head  oil  was  poured ;  but 
water  was  never  religiously  sprinkled  or  poured ;  but  the  wash- 
ing or  immersing  in  it  was  the  universal — the  immutable  prac- 
tice since  the  world  began. 

Blood  had  primary  respect  to  guilt;  therefore,  it  was  sprinkled. 
Oil  had  primary  respect  to  the  Spirit ;  therefore,  it  was  poured 
out.  Water  had  primary  respect  to  cleansing  the  person  from 
pollution ;  therefore,  immersion  or  bathing  in  it  was  always 
obligatory  on  those  who  sought  personal  cleansing  from  legal  or 
any  other  sort  of  uncleanness. 

Touching  the  meaning  of  the  blood-red  heifer  and  her  ashes, 
it  is  important  to  know  that  blood  could  not  be  sprinkled  only 
when  warm ;  therefore,  neither  by  itself  nor  in  water  was  it 
adapted  to  aspersion.  But,  to  show  that  its  virtue  was  not  mo- 
mentary as  its  heat,  and  that  the  atoning  elBBcacy  of  sacrifice 
continued  long  after  the  death  of  the  victim,  the  burning  of  the 
heifer  and  the  preservation  of  her  ashes  for  an  age  was  an  ad- 
mirable provision.  And,  because  many  are  to  partake  in  the 
efficacy  of  one  sacrifice,  the  joint  distribution  of  it  was  beauti- 
fully adumbrated  by  the  action  of  sprinkling.  Good  reasons 
can  be  given  for  the  three  actions,  sprinkling,  pouring,  dipping ; 
and  for  their  never  being  confounded  in  Holy  Writ.  The  heart 
is  sprinkled,  the  head  anointed,  and  the  body  bathed.  Infant 
or  adult  sprinkling  with  water  is  a  papal  legend,  an  idle  cere- 
mony, without  a  shadow  of  evidence  in  Old  Testament  or  New.* 


*  It  is  worthy  of  note,  that  these  actions  under  the  law  were  always  on  persons 
already  members ;  and  not  to  make  them  such. 


178  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

Argument  12. — Convertible  Terms. 

For  the  special  benefit  of  the  more  uneducated,  I  shall  deduce 
my  twelfth  argument  for  immersion  from  the  first  precept  of 
the  decalogue  of  philology.  That  precept,  according  to  my  copy, 
reads  thus: — The  definition  of  a  word  and  the  word  itself  are 
alioays  co7ivertible  terms.  For  example : — a  law  is  a  7'ule  of  ac- 
tion— is  equivalent  to  saying,  a  rule  of  action  is  a  laio.  Philan- 
thropy is  the  love  of  man — is  equivalent  to  saying,  the  love  of  man 
is  philanthropy.  Now,  if  a  definition,  or  translation,  (which  is 
the  same  thing,)  be  correct,  the  definition,  if  substituted  for  the 
term  defined,  will  always  make  good  sense,  and  be  congruous 
with  all  the  words  in  construction. 

In  order,  then,  to  test  the  correctness  of  any  definition  or 
translation,  we  have  only  to  substitute  it  in  the  place  of  the  ori- 
ginal word  defined  or  translated.  If,  in  all  places,  the  definition 
makes  good  sense,  that  is,  if  it  be  convertible  with  the  word 
defined,  it  is  correct ;  if  not,  it  is  incorrect.  Let  any  one  un- 
acquainted with  Greek  take  a  New  Testament,  beginning  with 
the  first  occurrence  of  haptizo,  or  any  of  its  family,  and  always 
substitute  for  it  the  definition  or  translation  given,  and,  if  it  be 
the  correct  one,  it  will  make  sense ;  good,  intelligible  sense,  in 
every  instance. 

We,  then,  read: — *'In  those  days,  the  Jews  of  Jerusalem  and 
Judea  went  out  to  John,  and  were  sprinkled  by  him  in  the  Jor- 
dan, confessing  their  sins.^'  To  perceive  the  impossibility  of 
such  an  occurrence,  it  is  only  necessary  to  know  that  the  word 
sprinkle  is  always  followed  by  the  substance  sprinkled,  and 
next  by  the  object.  "VVe  can  sprinkle  ashes,  dust,  water,  or 
blood,  &c.,  because  the  particles  can  be  severed  with  ease ;  but 
can  we  sprinkle  a  man?  We  may  sprinkle  something  upon  him; 
but  it  is  impossible  for  any  man  to  sprinkle  another  in  a  river; 
and  it  is  e(iually  so  to  sprinkle  the  river  upon  him.  The  same 
reasoning  will  apply  to  j^oiir.  This  verb  is  also  to  be  followed 
by  the  substance  poured.  Now,  was  it  not  impossible  to  pour 
the  Jews  in  the  Jordan,  or  anywhere  else?  And  to  pour  the 
Jordan  upon  them  would  bo  as  unacceptable  to  them  as  it  would 


ACTION   OF  BAPTISM.  179 

have  been  impossible  for  the  Baptist.  It  remains,  then,  that  we 
try  the  word  immerse.  That,  too,  is  followed  by  the  substance  to  • 
be  immersed.  Now,  a  man  can  be  immersed  in  water,  in  oil, 
in  sand,  in  grief,  in  debt,  or  in  the  Spirit ;  though  it  is  impos- 
sible to  pour  him  into  any  one  of  these.  Having,  then,  sub- 
jected these  three  to  the  same  law  of  trial,  two  are  condemned 
and  reprobate:  one  only  is  possible,  desirable,  and  reason- 
able. 

This  test  will  hold  to  the  end  of  the  volume  ;  even  where  the 
association  may  appear  strange  and  uncouth  in  style,  it  will 
always  be  not  only  practicable  in  fact,  but  good  in  meaning. 
For  example :  Jesus  was  to  baptize  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
influence  of  the  Spirit  poured  out  fills  some  place ;  into  that 
persons  may  be  immersed :  as  we  are  said  to  be  immersed  in 
debt,  in  affliction,  in  any  special  trouble ;  but  a  person  cannot 
be  poured  or  sprinkled  into  these.  Such  an  operation  is  always 
impossible,  under  any  view,  literal  or  figurative. 

Let  it  be  carefully  noted,  in  this  most  useful  test,  that  the 
three  words  are  all  to  be  subjected  to  the  same  laws.  1st.  The 
material  is  always  to  follow  the  verb.  2d.  The  place,  or  thing, 
or  relation  into  which  the  action  is  to  be  performed  is  to  follow  ' 
the  material.  In  baptism,  the  material  is  a  man ;  the  element, 
water.  Now,  as  John  cannot  pour  the  material  James,  neither 
can  he  sprinkle  him ;  but  he  can  immerse  him  in  a  river,  in 
debt,  in  grief,  &c.  It  is  highly  improper  and  ungrammatical  to 
use  such  a  phrase,  unless  by  special  agreement  of  the  parties 
present. 

Some  persons,  accustomed  to  a  very  loose  style,  see  no  impro- 
priety in  the  phrase,  "sprinkle  him — pour  him,"  because  of  the 
supplement  in  their  own  minds.  They  think  of  the  material 
which  is  sprinkled  or  poured  upon  him,  and,  for  brevity's  sake, 
say  sprinkle  him ;  that  is,  sprinkle  dust  or  water  upon  him. 
But,  in  testing  the  propriety  of  such  phrases,  the  ellipsis  must 
be  supplied.  There  is  no  ellipsis  in  '^immerse  Mm;''  but  there 
is  always  in  sprinkle  or  pour  Mm.  The  material  is  suppressed, 
because  it  is  supposed  to  be  understood,  as  in  the  case — sprinkle 
dean  loater  upon  him.  Now,  while  the  abbreviation  may  be 
tolerated,  so  far  as  time  is  concerned,  it  is  intolerable  in  physi- 
cal and  grammatical  propriety  ;  because  it  is  physically  impos- 
sible to  scatter  a  man  into  particles  like  dust,  or  to  pour  him 
out  like  water ;  and  it  is  grammatically  improper  to  suppress 


180  ACTION   OP  BAPTISM. 

the  proper  object  of  the  verb,  and  to  place  after  it  a  word  not 
governed  by  it. 

Before  submitting  my  next  argument  on  this  proposition,  I 
beg  leave  to  introduce  the  special  testimony  of  one  of  America's 
most  eminent  classic  scholars.  I  believe  I  only  accord  with  en- 
lightened public  opinion,  when  I  introduce  Professor  Charles 
Anthon,  of  Columbia  College,  New  York,  as  one  of  the  most 
distinguished  Greek  scholars  in  the  Union.  His  long  devotion 
to  the  study  and  teaching  of  this  language  is  not  the  only  rea- 
son of  this  superiority.  His  laborious  researches  in  ancient 
literature,  his  critical  collation  of  copies,  various  readings,  mar- 
ginal notes,  general  criticisms,  as  editor  of  so  many  of  the  clas- 
sics already  in  our  colleges,  and  his  excellent  classical  dictionary, 
have  obtained  for  him  this  high  reputation. 

Being  addressed  by  Dr.  Parmly,  of  New  York,  on  the  subject 
of  this  proposition,  last  spring,  he  favoured  him  with  the  follow- 
ing answer.  I  shall  quote  the  correspondence,  that  the  subject 
may  come  fau-ly  before  the  reader. 

No.  1,  Bond  Street,  N.  Y.,  March  23,  1843. 
Professor  Charles  Anthon  : 

In  conversation  with  Dr.  Spring,  last  evening,  he  stated,  that 
in  the  original  the  word  baptism,  which  we  find  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, has  no  definite  or  distinct  meaning ; — that  it  means  to 
immerse,  sprinkle,  pour,  and  has  a  variety  of  other  meanings — 
as  much  the  one  as  the  other,  and  that  every  scholar  knows  it ; — 
that  it  was  the  only  word  that  could  have  been  selected  by  our 
Saviour,  having  such  a  variety  as  to  suit  every  one's  views  and 
purposes.  May  I  ask  you,  if  your  knowledge  of  the  language 
from  which  the  word  was  taken  has  led  you  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion ?  And  may  I  beg  of  you  to  let  the  deep  interest  I  take  in 
the  subject  plead  my  apology. 

I  have  the  honour  to  be,  with  great  respect,  most  respectfully 

y^"^«'  E.  Parmly. 


Col.  College,  March  27, 1843. 
My  dear  Sir : 

There  is  no  authority  whatever  for  the  singular  remark  made 
by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Spring,  relative  to  the  force  of  baptizo.  The  pri- 
mary meaning  of  the  word  is  to  dip  or  immerse;  and  its  second- 
ary meanings,  if  it  ever  have  any,  all  refer  in  some  way  or  other 
to  the 'same  leading  idea.  Si)rinkling,  &c.  are  entirely  out  of 
the  question.    I  have  delayed  answering  your  letter,  in  the  hope 


ACTION   OF   BAPTISM.  181 

that  you  would  call  and  favour  me  with  a  visit,  when  we  might 
talk  the  matter  over  at  our  leisure.  I  presume,  however,  that 
what  I  have  here  written  will  answer  your  purpose. 

Yours  truly, 

Charles  Anthon. 

Like  all  our  testimonies,  this  comes  from  one  who  is  not  of 
us.  I  believe.  Dr.  Anthon  is  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
in  New  York,  of  which  his  brother,  Dr.  Anthon,  is  pastor.  We 
have  yet  another  argument  to  offer  on  this  subject,  and  shall 
then  leave  it  with  our  readers. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Argument  13. — History  of  Immersion  and  Sprinkling. 

Argument  thirteenth  is  a  mere  sketch  of  the  history  of  im- 
mersion and  sprinkling.  On  the  subject  of  immersion,  we  shall 
commence  with  the  primitive  Greek  fathers.  "We  have  examined 
all  their  extant  writings,  and  give  the  following  as  the  sum  of  all 
that  can  be  gathered  from  them  on  immersion. 

Barnabas :  "Consider  how  he  hath  joined  both  the  cross  and 
the  water  together ;  for  this  he  saith,  '  Blessed  are  they  who, 
putting  their  trust  in  the  cross,  descend  into  the  water.'  '^  *  * 
Again,  "  We  go  down  into  the  water,  full  of  sin  and  pollutions  ; 
but  come  up  again  bringing  forth  fruit;  having  in  our  hearts  the 
fear  and  hope  which  is  in  Jesus." 

Hermes,  writing  about  a.  d.  95,  speaking  of  baptism  and 
backsliders,  says,  "  They  are  such  as  have  heard  the  word,  and 
were  willing  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord;  but,  when 
they  call  to  mind  what  holiness  it  required  in  those  who  pro- 
fessed the  truth,  withdrew  themselves.''  Again,  "Before  man 
receives  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  he  is  ordained  to  death ; 
but,  when  he  receives  that  seal,  he  is  freed  from  death,  and  deli- 
vered unto  life :  now,  that  seal  is  water,  into  which  men  descend 
under  an  obligation  to  death,  but  ascend  out  of  it,  being  ap- 
pointed unto  life." 

Justin  Martyr.  About  a,  d.  140,  Justin  Martyr  wrote  "  An 
Apology  for  Christians ;  addressed  to  the  Emperor,  the  Senate, 
and  People  of  Rome."  In  this  work,  he  describes  the  doctrines 
and  ordinances  of  the  Church  of  Christ ;  and,  on  baptism,  has 
the  following  passage: — "I  will  now  declare  to  you,  also,  after 

16 


182  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

what  manner  we,  "being  made  new  by  Christ,  have  dedicated  our- 
selves to  God ;  lest,  if  I  should  leave  that  out,  I  might  seem  to 
deal  unfairly  in  some  part  of  my  apology.  They  who  are  per- 
suaded and  do  believe  that  those  things  which  are  taught  by  ua 
are  true,  and  do  promise  to  live  according  to  them,  are  directed 
first  to  pray  and  ask  of  God,  with  fasting,  the  forgiveness  of  their 
former  sins  ;  and  we  also  pray  and  fast  with  them.  Then  we 
bring  them  to  some  place  where  there  is  water,  and  they  are 
baptized  by  the  same  way  of  baptism  by  which,  we  were  bap- 
tized :  for  they  are  washed  [en  to  udati)  in  the  water  in  the  name 
of  God  the  Father,  Lord  of  all  things  ;  and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Tertullian,  a.  d.  204:  "Because  the  person,  [to  be  baptized,] 
in  great  simplicity  ...  is  let  down  in  the  water,  and,  with  a 
few  words  said,  is  dipped."  Homo  in  aqua  demissus,  et  inter 
pauca  verba  tinctus.  Again,  when  speaking  of  the  vain  anxiety 
to  be  baptized  in  the  Jordan, — "  There  is  no  difference,  whether 
one  is  washed  in  a  sea  or  in  a  pool,  in  a  river  or  in  a  fountain, 
in  a  lake  or  in  a  channel ;  nor  is  there  any  difference  between 
them  whom  John  dipped  in  the  Jordan  and  those  whom  Peter 
dipped  in  the  Tiber :"  quos  Joannes  in  Jordane,  et  quos  Petrus 
in  Tiberi  tinxit.  He  also  uses  the  words,  "In  aqua  mergimur," 
t.  e.  we  are  immersed  in  the  water. 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  a.  d.  360:  "We  are  buried  with  Christ 
by  baptism,  that  we  may  also  rise  again  with  him ;  we  descend 
with  him,  that  we  may  also  be  lifted  up  with  him ;  we  ascend 
with  him,  that  we  also  may  be  glorified  with  him." 

Basil,  A.  D.  360:  ''En  trisi  tais  Jcatadiisesi,  &c.  By  three  im- 
mersions, the  great  mystery  of  baptism  is  accomplished.'^ 

Ambrose,  a.  d.  374:  "Thou  wast  asked,  'Dost  thou  believe  in 
God  the  Father  Almighty?'  Thou  saidst,  'I do  believe/  and  wast 
immersed;  that  is,  thou  wast  buried,  (mersisti,  hoc  est,  sepultus 
es.)  Thou  wast  again  asked,  *Dost  thou  believe  on  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  and  his  crucifixion?'  Thou  saidst,  'I believe,'  and 
wast  immersed  again,  and  so  wast  buried  with  Christ." 

Cyril,  of  Jerusalem,  a.  d.  374:  "As  he  ho  endunon  en  tois  vdasi, 
who  is  plunged  in  the  water,  and  baptized,  is  encompassed  by 
the  water  on  every  side ;  so  they  that  are  baptized  by  the  Spirit 
are  also  wholly  covered  all  over." 

Chrysostom,  a.  d.  398  :  "To  be  baptized  [kai  Tcatoduestliai)  and 
plunged,  and  then  to  emerge  or  rise  again,  is  a  symbol  of  our 
descent  into  the  grave,  and  our  ascent  out  of  it;  and,  therefore, 
Paul  calls  baptism  a  burial." 

Witsius:  "It  is  certain,  that  both  John  the  Baptist  and  the 
disciples  of  Christ,  ordinarily  practised  immersion ;  whose  exam- 
ple was  followed  by  the  ancient  church,  as  Vossins  has  shown 
by  producing  many  testimonies  from  the  Greek  and  Latin 
writers." 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  183 

Mr.  Bower :  "  Baptism  by  immersion  was,  undoubtedly,  the 
apostolical  practice,  and  was  never  dispensed  with  by  the  church, 
except  in  case  of  sickness.^^ 

G.  J.  Vossius  :  "  That  the  apostles  immersed  whom  they  bap- 
tized, there  is  no  doubt.  .  .  .  And  that  the  ancient  church  fol- 
lowed their  example  is  very  clearly  evinced  by  innumerable 
testimonies  of  the  fathers." 

Mr.  Reeves  :  "  The  ancients  carefully  observed  trine-immer- 
sion, insomuch  that,  by  the  '  Canons  Apostolical,'  either  bishop 
or  presbyter  who  baptized  without  it  was  deposed  from  the  mi- 
nistry." 

Encyclopaedia  Ecclesiastica:  "Whatever  weight,  however,  may 
be  in  these  reasons  as  a  defence  for  the  present  practice  of 
sprinkling,  it  is  evident  that,  during  the  first  ages  of  the  church, 
and  for  many  centuries  afterwards,  the  practice  of  immersion 
prevailed ;  and  which  seems,  indeed,  never  to  be  departed  from, 
except  where  it  was  administered  to  a  person  at  the  point  of 
death,  or  upon  the  bed  of  sickness, — which  was  considered,  in- 
deed, not  as  giving  the  party  the  full  privileges  of  baptism, — or 
when  there  was  not  a  sufficient  supply  of  water.  Except  in  the 
above  cases,  the  custom  was  to  dip  or  immerse  the  whole  body. 
Hence  St.  Barnabas  says,  'We  go  down  into  the  water,' "  &c. 

Mr.  Wall,  (who  explored  all  the  voluminous  writers  of  anti- 
quity in  search  of  evidence  of  infant  baptism,)  says,  "  This  [im- 
mersion] is  so  plain,  and  olear,  by  an  infinite  number  of  passages, 
that  as  one  cannot  but  pity  the  weak  endeavours  of  such  Pedo- 
baptists  as  would  maintain  the  negative  of  it,  so  we  ought  to 
disown  and  show  a  dislike  of  the  profane  scoffs  which  some  peo- 
ple give  to  the  English  Antipedobaptists  [Baptists]  merely  for 
the  use  of  dipping ;  when  it  was,  in  all  probability,  the  way  by 
which  our  blessed  Saviour,  and  for  certain,  was  the  most  usual 
and  ordinary  way  by  which  the  ancient  Christians  did  receive 
their  baptism.  'Tis  a  great  want  of  prudence,  as  well  as  of 
honesty,  to  refuse  to  grant  to  an  adversary  what  is  certainly 
true,  and  may  be  proved  so.  It  creates  a  jealousy  of  all  the 
rest  that  one  says."  "  The  custom  of  the  Christians  in  the  near 
succeeding  times  [to  the  apostles]  being  more  largely  and  parti- 
cularly delivered  in  books,  is  known  to  have  been  generally  or 
ordinarily  a  total  immersion." 

Professor  Campbell:  "I  have  heard  a  disputant,  in  defiance 
of  etymology  and  use,  maintain  that  the  word  rendered  in  the 
New  Testament  baptize,  means  more  properly  to  sprinkle  than 
to  plunge  ;  and,  in  defiance  of  all  antiquity,  that  the  former  was 
the  earliest,  and — the  most  general  practice  in  baptizing.  One 
who  argues  in  this  manner  never  fails,  with  persons  of  know- 
ledge, to  betray  tlie  cause  Tie  would  defend;  and  though,  with 
respect  to  the  vulgar,  bold  assertions  generally  succeed  as  well 
as  argument,  and  sometimes  better;  yet  a  candid  mind  will 


184  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

always  disdain  to  take  the  Tielp  of  falsehood,  even  in  the  support 
of  truth/'' 

Edinburgh  Reviewers :  "  We  have  rarely  met,  for  example, 
with  a  more  weak  and  fanciful  piece  of  reasoning  than  that  by 
which  Mr.  Ewing  would  persuade  us  that  there  is  no  allusion  to 
the  mode  by  immersion,  in  the  expression  'buried  with  him  in 
baptism/  This  point  ought  to  be  frankly  admitted,  and,  indeed, 
cannot  be  denied  with  any  show  of  reason." 

Bishoj)  Bossuet :  "  We  are  able  to  make  it  appear,  by  the  acts 
of  councils,  and  by  the  ancient  rituals,  that  for  thirteen  hun- 
dred YEARS,  baptism  was  thus  [by  immersion]  administered 
throughout  the  whole  church,  as  far  as  possible." 

Stackhouse:  "Several  authors  have  shown,  and  proved,  that 
this  immersion  continued,  as  much  as  possible,  to  be  used  for 
thirteen  hundred  years  after  Christ." 

Stuart :  '*  The  mode  of  baptism  by  immersion,  the  Oriental 
church  has  always  continued  to  preserve,  even  down  to  the  pre- 
sent time :  see  Alatii  de  Eccles.  Orient,  et  Occident,  lib.  iii.  ch. 
12.  sec.  4;  Acta  et  Script.  Theol.  Wirtemb.  et  Patriarch.  Con- 
stant. Jer.  p.  63,  p.  238  sq. ;  Christ.  Engeli  Enchirid.  de  Statu 
hodierno  Graecor.  ch.  24 ;  Augusti,  Denkwurd.  vii.  p.  226.  sq. 
The  members  of  this  church  are  accustomed  to  call  the  members 
of  the  western  churches  sprinkled  Christians,  by  way  of  ridicule 
and  contempt:  Walch^s  Einleit.  in  die  relig.  Streitigkeiten,  Th. 
V.  pp.  476-481.  They  maintain  i\i2ii4)aptizo  can  mean  nothing 
but  immerge :  and  that  baptism  by  sprinkling  is  as  great  a  sole- 
cism as  immersion  by  aspersion  ;  and  they  claim  to  themselves 
the  honour  of  having  preserved  the  ancient  sacred  rite  of  the 
church  free  from  change  and  from  corruption,  which  would  de- 
stroy its  significancy :  see  Alex,  de  Stourdza,  Considerations  sur 
la  Doctrine  et  FEsprit  de  FEglise  Orthodoxe,  Stutt.  1816,  pp, 
83-89. 

*'F.  Brenner,  a  Roman  Catholic  vn*iter,  has  recently  published 
a  learned  work,  which  contains  a  copious  history  of  usages  in 
respect  to  the  baptismal  rite:  viz.  Geschichtliche  Darstollung  der 
Verrlchtung  der  Taufe,  etc.,  1818.  I  have  not  seen  the  work ; 
but  it  is  spoken  of  highly,  on  account  of  the  diligence  and  learn- 
ing which  the  author  has  exhibited  in  his  historical  details.  The 
result  of  them,  respecting  the  point  before  us,  I  present,  as  given 
by  Augusti,  Denkwurd.  vii.  p.  68. 

"'Thirteen  hundred  years  was  baptism  generally  and  ordi- 
narily performed  by  the  immersion  of  a  man  under  water ;  and 
only  in  extraordinary  cases  was  sprinkling  or  afiFusion  permitted. 
These  latter  methods  of  baptism  wore  called  in  question  and 
even  prohibited.'  Brenner  adds.  Tor  fifteen  hundred  years  was 
the  person  to  be  baptized,  either  by  immersion  or  aflfusion,  en- 
tirely divested  of  his  garments.' 

<*Thcao  results  will  serve  to  show  what  a  Roman  Catholic 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  1$S 

writer  feels  himself  forced  by  historical  facts  to  allow,  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  present  practice  of  his  own  church ;  which 
nowhere  practises  immersion,  except  in  the  churches  of  Milan : 
it  being  everywhere  else  even  forbidden. 

*'  In  the  work  of  John  Floyer,  on  Cold  Bathing,  page  50,  it  is 
mentioned  that  the  English  Church  practised  immersion  down  to 
the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century;  when  a  change  to  the 
method  of  sprinkling  gradually  took  place.  As  a  confirmation 
of  this,  it  may  be  mentioned  that  the  first  Liturgy,  in  1547,  en- 
joins a  trine-immersion,  in  case  the  child  is  not  sickly :  Augusti, 
ut  sup.  p.  229. 

"  We  have  collected  facts  enough  to  authorize  us  now  to  come 
to  the  following  general  conclusion  respecting  the  practice  of 
the  Christian  Church  in  general,  with  regard  to  the  mode  of 
baptism,  viz.  from  the  earliest  ages  of  which  we  have  any  ac- 
count, subsequent  to  the  apostolic  age,  and  downwards  for  seve- 
ral centuries,  the  churches  did  generally  practise  baptism  by 
immersion,  perhaps  hij  immersion  of  the  whole  person;  and  that 
the  only  exceptions  to  this  mode  which  were  usually  allowed, 
were  in  cases  of  urgent  sickness,  or  other  cases  of  immediate  and 
imminent  danger,  where  immersion  could  not  be  practised. 

"It  may  also  be  mentioned  here,  that  aspersion  and  ajfiisiony 
which  had  in  particular  cases  been  now  and  then  practised  in 
primitive  times,  were  gradually  introduced.  These  became,  at 
length,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  quite  common,  in  the  western 
church  almost  universal,  sometime  before  the  Reformation. 

"  In  what  manner,  then,  did  th«  Churches  of  Christ,  from  a 
very  early  period,  to  say  the  least,  understand  the  word  haptizo 
in  the  New  Testament  ?  Plainly,  they  construed  it  as  meaning 
immersion.  They,  sometimes,  even  went  so  far  as  to  forbid  any 
other  method  of  administering  the  ordinance,  cases  of  necessity 
and  mercy  only  excepted. 

"If,  then,  we  are  left  in  doubt,  after  a  philological  investigation 
of  haptizo,  how  much  it  necessarily  implies ;  if  the  circumstances 
which  are  related  as  accompanying  this  rite,  so  far  as  the  New 
Testament  has  given  them,  leave  us  still  in  doubt ;  if  we  cannot 
trace,  with  any  certainty,  the  Jewish  proselyte-baptism  to  a  pe- 
riod as  early  as  the  baptism  of  John  and  Jesus,  so  as  to  draw 
any  inferences  with  probability  from  this ;  still,  we  are  left  in 
no  doubt  as  to  the  more  generally  received  usage  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  down  to  a  period  several  centuries  after  the  apos- 
tolic age. 

"That  the  Greek- fathers,  and  the  Latin  ones  who  were  fa- 
miliar with  the  Greek,  understood  the  usual  import  of  the  word 
haptizo,  would  hardly  seem  to  be  capable  of  a  denial.  That 
they  might  be  confirmed  in  their  view  of  the  import  of  this 
word,  by  common  usage  among  the  Greek  classic  authors,  we 

16* 


1^  ACTION   OF  BAPTISM. 

have  seen  in  the  first  part  of  this  dissertation."     Stuart^s  Bib. 
Kepos.  p.  662. 

To  an  authority  so  plenary  and  venerable  with  all  the  Pedo- 
baptists  of  New  England  and  of  the  Union,  little  can  be  added 
from  other  sources.  One  short  step  more,  however,  would  have 
destroyed  all  this  authority,  so  far  as  serviceable  to  us ;  for  then 
Professor  Stuart  would  have  been  a  Baptist.  He  has,  then,  said 
all  that  a  Pedobaptist  could  say,  both  in  the  philological  and 
also  in  the  historical  department.  That  he  can  repose  in  satis- 
faction upon  a  probability  so  perfectly  slender,  is  a  problem  in 
casuistry  to  which  I  shall  not  now  allow  myself  to  advert ;  that 
he  has  not  one  chance  in  ten  thousand  to  be  safe  on  this  point, 
his  own  reasonings  show. 

Keander's  History  of  the  CJiristian  Religion :  *'  Baptism  was  ori- 
ginally administered  by  immersion ;  and  many  of  the  compari- 
sons of  St.  Paul  allude  to  this  form  of  its  administration :  the 
immersion  is  a  symbol  of  death,  of  being  buried  with  Christ ; 
the  coming  forth  from  the  water  is  a  symbol  of  a  resurrection 
with  Christ;  and  both,  taken  together,  represent  the  second 
birth,  the  death  of  the  old  man,  and  a  resurrection  to  a  new  life. 
An  exception  was  made  only  in  the  case  of  sick  persons,  which 
was  necessary,  and  they  received  baptism  by  sprinkling.'^ 

Mosheini's  Ecclesiastical  History — 1^^  century :  ' '  The  sacrament 
of  baptism  was  administered  in  this  century,  without  the  public 
assemblies,  in  places  appointed  and  prepared  for  the  purpose, 
and  was  performed  by  immersion  of  the  whole  body  in  the  bap- 
tismal font. 

"The  sacrament  of  baptism  vras  administered  publicly  twice 
every  year,  at  the  festivals  of  Easter  and  Pentecost  or  Whitsun- 
tide, either  by  the  bishop  or  the  presbyters  in  consequence  of 
his  authorization  and  appointment.  The  persons  that  wore  to 
be  baptized,  after  they  had  repeated  the  creed,  confessed  and 
renounced  their  sins,  and  particularly  the  devil  and  his  pompous 
allurements,  were  immersed  under  water,  and  received  into 
Christ's  kingdom  by  a  solemn  invocation  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost,  according  to  the  express  command  of  our  blessed 
Lord.  After  baptism,  they  received  the  sign  of  the  cross,  were 
anointed,  and,  by  prayers  and  imposition  of  hands,  were  so- 
lemnly commended  to  the  mercy  of  God,  and  dedicated  to  his 
service ;  in  consequence  of  which,  they  received  the  milk  and 
lioney,  which  concluded  the  ceremony.  The  reasons  of  this 
particular  ritual  coincide  with  what  we  have  said  in  general 
concerning  the  origin  and  causes  of  the  multiplied  ceremonies 
that  crept,  from  time  to  time,  into  tlie  church.     [2d  century.] 

"Adult  persons  were  prepared  for  baptism  by  abstinence, 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  187 

prayer,  and  other  pious  exercises.  It  was  to  answer  for  them 
that  sponsors  or  godfathers  were  first  instituted,  though  they 
were  afterward  admitted  also  in  the  baptism  of  infants. 

"  There  were,  twice  a  year,  stated  times  when  baptism  was  ad- 
ministered to  such  as,  after  a  long  course  of  trial  and  prepara- 
tion, offered  themselves  as  candidates  for  the  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity. This  ceremony  was  performed  only  in  the  presence  of 
Buch  as  were  already  initiated  into  the  Christian  mysteries. 

"We  have  only  to  add,  that  none  were  admitted  to  this  solemn 
ordinance,  until,  by  the  menacing  and  formidable  shouts  and  de- 
clamation of  the  exorcist,  they  had  been  delivered  from  the  do- 
minion of  the  prince  of  darkness,  and  consecrated  to  the  service 
of  God.  The  origin  of  this  superstitious  ceremony  may  be  easily 
traced,  when  we  consider  the  prevailing  opinion  of  the  times. 
The  driving  out  of  this  demon  was  now  considered  as  an  essen- 
tial preparation  for  baptism  ;  after  the  administration  of  which, 
the  candidates  returned  home,  adorned  with  crowns  and  arrayed 
in  white  garments,  as  sacred  emblems  ;  the  former,  of  their  vic- 
tory over  sin  and  the  world ;  the  latter,  of  their  inward  purity 
and  innocence.'^     [Sd  century.'] 

Histonj  of  the  Church,  hy  George  Waddington,  M.  A.:  ** The 
ceremony  of  immersion  (the  oldest  form  of  baptism)  was  per- 
formed in  the  name  of  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity ;  it  was 
believed  to  be  attended  by  the  remission  of  original  sin,  and  the 
entire  regeneration  of  the  infant  or  convert,  by  the  passage  from 
the  land  of  bondage  into  the  kingdom  of  salvation.'^ 

Text-Book  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  hy  J.  C.  I.  Geiseler :  "  The 
custom  of  considering  certain  doctrines  and  rites  as  mysteries 
[in  the  3d  and  4th  centuries]  would  naturally  have  some  effect 
on  the  mode  of  admission  to  the  church.  Baptism  was  preceded 
by  a  long  preparatory  course,  during  which  the  catechumens 
[katechoumenoi)  were  gradually  led,  from  general  religious  and 
moral  truths,  to  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Christianity,  by  teachers 
appointed  for  the  purpose,  [catechistes,)  and  must  pass  through 
various  grades  {audientes,  genuflectentes,  competentes,)  before  they 
were  deemed  fit  to  be  actually  admitted.  This  course  usually 
occupied  several  years,  and  often  the  catechumens  voluntarily 
deferred  their  baptism  as  long  as  possible,  on  account  of  the  re- 
mission of  sins  by  which  it  was  accompanied.  Hence,  it  was 
often  necessary  to  baptize  the  sick,  and  in  that  case  sprinkling 
(haptismus  clinicoi-um,  tern,  klinikou,)  was  substituted  for  the 
usual  rite.  The  baptism  of  infants  became  now  more  common. 
The  use  of  exorcism  is  distinctly  mentioned,  and  all  who  had 
been  baptized,  even  the  children,  partook  of  the  Eucharist." 

Cave's  Primitive  Christianity:  " The  action  having  ]>roceeded 
thus  far,  the  party  to  be  baptized  was  wholly  immerged  or  put 
under  water ;  which  was  the  almost  constant  and  universal  cus- 
tom of  those  times,  whereby  they  did  more  notably  and  signifi- 


I^S  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

cantly  express  the  three  great  ends  and  effects  of  baptism.  For, 
as  in  immersion  there  are  in  a  manner  three  several  acts,  the 
putting  the  person  into  water,  his  abiding  there  for  a  little  time, 
and  his  rising  up  again  ;  so  by  these  were  represented  Christ's 
death,  burial,  and  resurrection;  and,  in  conformity  thereunto, 
our  dying  unto  sin,  the  destruction  of  its  power,  and  our  resur- 
rection to  a  new  course  of  life.  By  the  person's  being  put  into 
water  was  lively  represented  the  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins 
of  the  flesh,  and  being  washed  from  the  filth  and  pollution  of 
them ;  by  his  abode  under  it,  which  was  a  kind  of  burial  unto 
water,  his  entering  into  a  state  of  death  or  mortification,  like  as 
Christ  remained  for  some  time  under  the  state  or  power  of  death. 
Therefore,  as  many  as  are  baptized  into  Christ,  are  said  to  be 
*  baptized  into  his  death,  and  to  be  buried  with  him  by  baptism 
into  death,  that,  the  old  man  being  crucified  with  him,  the  body 
of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that  henceforth  he  might  not  serve 
sin,  for  that  he  that  is  dead  is  freed  from  sin,'  as  the  apostle 
clearly  explains  the  meaning  of  this  rite.  Then,  by  his  emer- 
sion, or  rising  up  out  of  the  water,  was  signified  his  entering 
upon  a  new  course  of  life,  differing  from  that  which  he  lived 
before,  that,  '  like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  to  the 
lory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of 
ife.'  " 

Grotius  :  ^^  Buried  icith  liim  hy  baptism.  Not  only  the  word, 
baptism,  but  the  very  form  of  it,  intimates  this  [immersion].  For 
an  immersion  of  the  whole  body  in  water,  so  that  it  is  no  longer 
beheld,  bears  an  image  of  that  burial  which  is  given  to  the  dead. 
There  was  in  baptism,  as  administered  in  former  times,  an  image 
both  of  a  burial  and  of  a  resurrection." 

Bishop  Taylor:  "The  custom  of  the  ancient  churches  was  not 
sprinkling,  but  immersion  ;  in  pursuance  of  the  sense  of  the  word 
(baptize)  in  the  commandment  and  example  of  our  blessed  Sa- 
viour. Now  this  was  of  so  sacred  account  in  their  esteem,  that 
they  did  not  think  it  lawful  to  receive  him  into  the  clergy  who 
had  been  only  sprinkled  in  his  baptism,  as  wo  learn  from  the 
Epistle  of  Cornelius  to  Fabius  of  Antioch." 

Archbishop  Usher :  "  Some  there  are,  that  stand  strictly  for 
the  particular  action  of  diving  or  dipping  the  baptized  under  the 
water,  as  the  only  action  which  the  institution  of  the  sacrament 
will  bear  ;  and  our  church  allows  no  other,  except  in  case  of  the 
child's  weakness ;  and  therein  is  expressed  our  Saviour's  bap- 
tism, both  the  descending  into  the  water,  and  the  rising  up." 

Church  of  England :  "As  wc  be  buried  with  Christ  by  our  l)ap- 
tlsm  into  death,  so  let  us  daily  die  to  sin,  mortifying  and  killing 
the  evil  motions  thereof.  And  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from 
death  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  so  let  us /-/.ve  to  a  new  life,  and 
walk  continually  therein."  In  the  directions  for  the  "  Public 
Baptism  of  Infants,"  the  Bookof  Common  Prayer  says  :  "Then 


I 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  18& 

the  priest  shall  take  the  child  into  his  hands,  and  shall  say  to 
the  godfathers  and  godmothers,  *  Name  this  child/  And  then, 
naming  it  after  them,  (if  they  shall  certify  him  that  the  child 
will  endure  it,)  he  shall  dip  it  in  the  water,  discreetly  and 
warily,  saying,'^  &c. 

Encyclopcedia  Britannica  :  "  The  Muscovite  priests  plunge  the 
child  three  times  over  head  and  ears  in  water/^ — Art.  Russia. 

Richard  Baxter :  "  It  is  commonly  confessed  by  us  to  the  Ana- 
baptists, as  our  commentators  declare,  that  in  the  apostles'  time, 
the  baptized  were  dipped  over  Jiead  in  the  water,  and  tkat  this 
signified  their  profession,  both  of  believing  the  burial  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ ;  and  of  their  own  present  renouncing  the  world 
and  flesh,  or  dying  to  sin  and  living  to  Christ,  or  rising  again  to 
newness  of  life,  or  being  buried  and  risen  again  with  Christ,  as 
the  apostle  expoundeth,  (Col.  iii.  and  Rom.  vi.;)  and  though  we 
have  thought  it  lawful  to  disuse  the  manner  of  dipping,  and  to 
use  less  water,  yet  we  presume  not  to  change  the  use  and  signi- 
fication of  it." 

To  these  testimonies  from  ecclesiastical  histories,  and  others 
alluding  to  ancient  records,  many  more  might  be  added  ;  such 
as  testimonies  from  Du  Pin,  Milner,  and  the  Roman  Fathers, 
without  at  all  increasing  the  evidence.  For,  on  reading  Mo- 
sheim's  notices  of  the  three  first  centuries,  we  may  see  the  ancient 
institution  and  the  continual  change  going  on  in  the  concomi- 
tant rites  and  usages,  as  clearly,  though  not  as  fully,  as  from  a 
thousand  volumes.  In  the  first  century  we  have  a  simple  im- 
mersion— a  few  additions  in  the  second — many  more  in  the 
third — and  so  on. 

We  shall,  therefore,  glance  for  a  moment  at  the  origin  and 
history  of  sprinkling,  and  thus  add  to  the  chapter  of  evidence 
now  before  us.  And  with  whom  should  we  more  naturally  com- 
mence than  with  the  father,  of  ecclesiastical  historians — Euse- 
bius  himself  ? — 

"Novatus,  being  relieved  thereof  by  the  exorcists,  fell  into  a 
grievous  distemper ;  and  it  being  supposed  that  he  would  die 
immediately,  he  received  haptism,  being  besprinkled*  with  water, 
on^  the  bed  wheron  he  lay,  (if  that  can  be  termed  baptism,) 
neither  when  he  had  escaped  that  sickness,  did  he  afterwards 

*  "This  word  perichutheis,  Rufinus  very  well  renders  perfusus,  besprinkled;  for 
people  who  were  sick,  and  were  baptized  in  their  beds,  could  not  be  dipped  in  water 
by  the  priest,  but  were  sprinkled  with  water  by  him.  This  baptism  was  thought 
imperfect,  and  not  solemn,  for  several  reasons.  Also,  they  who  were  thus  bap- 
tized were  called  ever  afterwards,  clinici ;  and,  by  the  12th  canon  of  the  Council 
of  Neocaesarea,  these  clinici  were  prohibited  the  priesthood."— ^Msebiws. 


190  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

receive  the  other  things  which  the  canon  of  the  church  enjoin- 
eth  should  be  received :  nor  was  he  sealed  by  the  Bishop's  im- 
position of  hands :  which,  if  he  never  received,  how  did  he  re- 
ceive the  Holy  Ghost  V 

The  canon  to  which  he  alludes  is  the  following: — 
"  That  they  who  were  baptized  in  their  beds,  if  they  recover 
again,  should  afterwards  go  to  the  Bishop  that  he  might  supply 
what  was  wanting  in  that  baptism." 

This  clinic  baptism  slowly  advanced,  but  never  got  into  much 
favor  for  thirteen  centuries.  As  to  the  introduction  and  pro- 
gress of  sprinkling,  the  Edinburgh  Cyclopaedia  gives  the  follow- 
ing account : 

"The  first  law  for  sprinkling  was  obtained  in  the  following 
manner :  Pope  Stephen  II.  being  driven  from  Rome  by  Adol- 
phus,  king  of  the  Lombards,  in  753,  fled  to  Pepin,  who,  a  short 
time  before,  had  usurped  the  crown  of  France.  Whilst  he  re- 
mained there,  the  monks  of  Cressy,  in  Britany,  consulted  him 
whether,  in  case  of  necessity,  baptism  poured  on  the  head  of  the 
infant  would  be  lawful.  Stephen  replied  that  it  would.  But 
though  the  truth  of  this  fact  be  allowed — which,  however,  some 
Catholics  deny — yet  pouring,  or  sprinkling,  was  admitted  only 
in  cases  of  necessity.  It  was  not  till  the  year  1311  that  the 
legislature,  in  a  council  held  at  Ravenna,  declared  immersion  or 
sprinkling  to  be  indifi'erent.  In  Scotland,  however,  sprinkling 
was  never  practised  in  ordinary  cases,  till  after  the  Reformation, 
(about  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century.)  From  Scotland, 
it  made  its  way  into  England,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  but  was 
not  authorized  in  the  Established  Church."  Art.  Baptism. 

Wall,  the  most  learned  and  able  of  Pedobaptist  writers,  gathers 
up  into  one  paragraph  a  volume  of  evidence  in  attestation  of  the 
fact  just  now  asserted.  I  shall  give  his  words  in  lieu  of  a  hun- 
dred extracts  which  can  be  readily  gleaned  from  ecclesiastic 
writers : — 

"France  seems  to  have  been  the  first  country  in  the  world 
where  baptism  by  affusion  was  used  ordinarily  to  persons  in 
health,  and  in  the  public  way  of  administering  it.  They  [the 
Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster]  reformed  the  font  into  a 
hasin.  This  learned  Assemljly  could  not  remember  that  fonts  to 
baptize  in  had  been  always  used  by  the  primitive  Christians  long 
before  the  beginning  of  Popery,  and  ever  since  churches  were 
built;  but  that  sprinkling,  for  the  common  use  of  baptizing,  was 
really  introduced  (in  France  first,  and  then  \j\  other  Popish 
countries)  in  times  of  Popery.  And  that  accordingly  all  those 
countries  in  which  the  usurped  y)Ower  of  the  Pope  is,  or  has  for- 
merly been  owned,  have  hft  ojf  dipping  of  children  in  the  font : 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  191 

but  that  all  other  countries  in  the  world,  which  had  never  re- 
garded his  authority,  do  still  use  it :  and  that  basins,  except  in 
case  of  necessity,  were  never  used  by  Papists,  or  any  other  Chris- 
tians whatsoever,  till  by  themselves.  Av  hat  has  been  said  of  this 
custom  of  pouring  or  sprinkling  water  in  the  ordinary  use  of 
baptism,  is  to  be  understood  only  in  reference  to  these  Western 
parts  of  Europe ;  for  it  is  used  ordinarily  no  where  else.  The 
Greek  Church,  in  all  the  branches  of  it,  does  still  use  immersion ; 
and  they  hardly  count  a  child,  except  in  case  of  sickness,  well 
baptized  without  it.  And  so  do  all  other  Christians  in  the 
world,  except  the  Latins.  That  which  I  hinted  before,  is  a  rule 
that  does  not  fail  in  any  particular  that  I  know  of,  viz.  All  the 
nations  of  Christians  that  do  now,  or  formerly  did  submit  to  the 
authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  do  ordinarily  baptize  their  in- 
fants by  pouring  or  sprinkling.  And  though  the  English  re- 
ceived not  this  custom  till  after  the  decay  of  Popery,  yet  they 
have  since  received  it  from  such  neighbouring  nations  as  had  be- 
gun in  the  time  of  the  Pope's  power.  But  all  other  Christians 
in  the  world,  who  never  owned  the  Pope's  usurped  power,  do, 
and  ever  did,  dip  their  infants  in  the  ordinary  use."  History  of 
Infant  Baptism,  Part  ii.  chap.  ix. 

Bishop  Burnet's  reason  for  the  change  is  thus  expressed  : — 
*'  The  danger  of  dipping  in  cold  climates  may  be  a  very  good 

reason  for  changing  the  form  of  baptism  to  sprinkling."  Vol.  iv., 

page  162. 

HISTORY   OF    SPRINKLING. 

Novatlan,  as  before  shown  in  the  histories  quoted,  had  water 
poured  all  over  him  in  a  bed.  This  happened  not  earlier  than  a.  d. 
251,  probably  253.  (Eusebius,  p.  114.)  About  eighty  years  after 
this  time,  when  other  sick  and  feeble  persons  were  preferring 
this  method  introduced  by  Novatian,  so  far  as  all  authentic  re- 
cords inform  us,  a  decree  was  issued,  called  "  the  12th  canon  of 
the  Council  of  Neocsesarea,"  against  such  pourings,  inhibiting 
persons  so  poured  upon  from  any  participation  in  the  honours  of 
the  ministry  or  priesthood.  Dr.  Wall,  who  cannot  be  suspected 
of  any  partiality  to  Baptists,  or  any  of  us,  gives  such  a  history 
of  the  introduction  of  sprinkling  and  pouring  as  must  satisfy 
every  candid  and  disinterested  man  that  it  came  into  use  by  slow 
degrees,  and  only  in  some  of  the  more  western  parts  of  the 
western  Latin  church,  and  that  for  full  thirteen  centuries  the 
whole  world  practised  immersion,  with  the  exception  of  invalids 
and  pretenders  of  inability  to  endure  cold  bathing.  Bonaven- 
ture,  in  a.  d.  IIGO,  alludes  to  sprinkling  in  France  as  becoming 


192  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

an  ordinary  practice.  So  do  tlie  Synod  of  Anglers,  1275,  speak 
of  dipping  and  pouring  as  indifferent.  The  Synod  of  Aix,  1585, 
allowed  pouring,  or  dipping  or  pouring,  according  to  the  usage  of 
the  church,  but  commanded  the  water  to  be  poured  out  of  ladles. 
It  made  very  little  progress  in  Italy,  Germany,  or  Spain,  till 
the  14th  and  15th  centuries.  Erasmus,  who  spent  some  time  in 
England,  during  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  observes,  "  With  ua 
[the  Dutch]  have  the  water  poured  on  them.  In  England  they 
are  dipped."  In  his  colloquy,  called  Ichihusphagia,  supposed  to 
have  been  written  in  England,  he  represents  infants  as  "  dipped 
all  over  in  cold  water,  soon  after  birth,  and  that,  too,  in  a  stone 
font."  Wickliffe  thought  it  immaterial  whether  they  be  dipped 
once,  or  thrice,  or  water  poured  upon  their  heads,  according  to 
the  custom  of  the  church  to  which  they  belong.  The  Manuale 
ad  Usum  Savum,  printed  1530,  the  2l8t  of  Henry  VIII.,  orders, 
*'Let  the  Priest  baptize  [the  candidate]  him  by  dipping  him  in 
tiie  water  thrice."  So  decrees  the  Common  Prayer  Book  of  Ed- 
ward VI.,  1549:  "the  Priest  shall  dip  it  in  the  water  thrice." 
Edward  VI.  was  himself  dipped :  so  was  Queen  Elizabeth.  Dip- 
ping continued  during  Queen  Mary's  reign.  Watson,  a  Papist 
Bishop,  in  1558,  the  last  of  the  Queen's  reign,  published  a  volume 
on  the  sacraments,  in  which  he  says,  "  Though  the  old  ancient 
tradition  of  the  church  hath  been  from  the  beginning  to  dip 
the  child  three  times,  it  is  sufficient." 

Wall:  "  It  being  allowed  to  weak  children  (though  strong 
enough  to  be  brought  to  church)  to  be  baptized  by  affusion, 
many  fond  ladies  and  gentlewomen  first,  and  then  by  degrees 
the  common  people,  would  obtain  the  favour  of  the  Priest  to 
have  their  children  pass  for  weak  children,  too  tender  to  endure 
dipping  in  the  water.  '  Especially,'  as  Mr.  Walker  observes, 
*  if  some  instances  really  were,  or  were  but  fancied  and  framed, 
of  some  child's  taking  cold  or  being  otherwise  prejudiced  by  its 
being  dipped.' " 

"  And  another  thing,  that  had  a  greater  influence  than  this, 
was,  that  many  of  our  English  divines  and  other  people  had, 
during  Queen  Mary's  bloody  reign,  fled  into  Germany,  Switzer- 
land, &c. ;  and,  coming  back,  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  they 
brought  with  them  a  great  love  to  the  customs  of  those  Protest- 
ant churches  wherein  they  had  sojourned  :  and  especially  the 
authority  of  Calvin,  -and  the  rules  which  he  had  established  at 
Geneva,  had  a  mighty  influence  on  a  great  number  of  our  peo- 
ple about  that  time.  Now,  Calvin  had  not  only  given  his  dic- 
tate in  his  Institutions,  that  *  the  difference  is  of  no  moment, 


ACTION  OF  BAPTISM.  193 

whether  he  that  is  baptized  be  dipped  all  over ;  and  if  so,  whe- 
ther thrice  or  once ;  or  whether  he  be  only  wetted  with  the  water 
poured  on  him  '.'  but  he  had  also  drawn  up  for  the  use  of  his 
church  at  Geneva,  (and  afterwards  published  to  the  world,)  a 
form  of  administering  the  sacraments,  where,  when  he  comes  to 
order  the  act  of  baptizing,  he  words  it  thus  :  '  Then  the  minister 
of  baptism  pours  water  on  the  infant,  saying,  I  baptize  thee/ 
&c.  There  had  been,  as  I  said,  some  synods  in  some  dioceses 
of  France  that  had  spoken  of  affusion  without  mentioning  im- 
mersion at  all ;  that  being  the  common  practice :  but  for  an 
office  or  liturgy  of  any  church,  this  is,  I  believe,  the  first  in  the 
world  that  prescribes  affusion  absolutely.  Then  Musculus  had 
determined, — *  As  for  dipping  of  the  infant,  we  judge  that  not 
so  necessary ;  but  that  it  is  free  for  the  church  to  baptize  either 
by  dipping  or  sprinkling/  So  that  (as  Mr.  Walker  observes)  no 
wonder  if  that  custom  prevailed  at  home,  which  our  reformed 
divines  in  the  time  of  the  Marian  persecution  had  found  to  be 
the  judgment  of  other  divines,  and  seen  to  be  the  practice  of 
other  churches  abroad ;  and  especially  of  Mr.  Calvin  and  his 
church  at  Geneva." 

"And  when  there  was  added  to  all  this  the  resolution  of  such 
a  man  as  Dr.  Whitaker,  Regius  Professor  at  Cambridge,  '  Though 
in  case  of  grown  persons  that  are  in  health,  I  think  dipping  to 
be  better ;  yet,  in  the  case  of  infants  and  of  sickly  people,  I 
think  sprinkling  sufficient.^  The  inclination  of  the  people, 
backed  with  these  authorities,  carried  the  practice  against  the 
rubric,  which  still  required  dipping,  except  in  case  of  weakness. 
So  that  in  the  latter  times  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  during  the 
reigns  of  King  James  and  King  Charles  I.,  very  few  children 
were  dipped  in  the  font." 

Concerning  the  use  of  basins,  Dr.  Wall  remarks : — 

"  The  use  was,  the  minister  continuing  in  his  reading-desk, 
the  child  was  brought  and  held  below  him ;  and  there  was  placed 
for  that  use  a  little  basin  of  water,  about  the  bigness  of  a  syl- 
labub-pot, into  which  the  minister  dipping  his  fingers,  and  then 
holding  his  hand  over  the  face  of  the  child,  some  drops  would 
fall  from  his  fingers  on  the  child's  face.  For  the  Directory  says, 
it  is  'not  only  lawful  but  most  expedient'  to  use  pouring  or 
sprinkling." 

How  the  Church  of  England  has  changed  its  practice,  the 
same  learned  doctor  observes : — 

"Upon  the  review  of  the  Common  PrayersBook,  at  the  restau- 
ration,  the  Church  of  England  did  not  think  fit  (however  preva- 
lent the  custom  of  sprinkling  was)  to  forego  their  maxim — that 
it  is  most  fitting  to  dip  children  that  are  well  able  to  bear  it. 
But  they  leave  it  wholly  to  the  judgment  of  the  godfathers  and 

17 


194  ACTION  OF  BAPTISM. 

those  who  bring  the  child,  whether  the  child  may  well  endure 
dipping,  or  not ;  as  they  are,  indeed,  the  most  proper  judges  of 
that.  So  the  priest  is  now  ordered,  *  If  the  godfathers  do  cer- 
tify him  that  the  child  may  well  endure  it,  to  dip  it  in  the  water 
discreetly  and  warily.  But,  if  they  certify  that  the  child  is  weak, 
it  shall  suffice  to  pour  water  upon  it.^  The  difference  is  only 
this :  by  the  rubric,  as  it  stood  before,  the  priest  was  to  dip, 
unless  there  were  an  allegation  of  weakness.  Nbiv,  he  is  not  to 
dip,  unless  there  be  an  averment  or  certifying  of  strength  suffi- 
cient to  endure  it." 

Amongst  the  most  distinguished  men  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land that,  in  Dr.  Wall's  time,  or  before  it,  argued  for  immersion, 
are  Sotus,  Mede,  Bishop  Taylor,  Dan.  Rogers,  Sir  Norton  Knatch- 
bull,  AYalker,  Towerson,  Whitby,  Dr.  Cave,  &c.  &c.  He  gives 
the  words  of  some  of  them : — • 

Sotus :  "  Baptism  ought  to  be  given  by  dipping ;  so  as  that  it 
is  not  lawful  to  give  it  otherwise,  unless  for  some  necessary,  or 
creditable,  and  reasonable  cause." 

Vasquez  says  of  sprinkling,  "That  it  is  not  at  all  in  use,  and 
so  cannot  be  practised  without  sin,  unless  for  some  particular 
cause." 

Mede :  "There  was  no  such  thing  as  sprinkling,  or  rantismos, 
used  in  baptism  in  the  Apostles'  times,  nor  many  ages  after 
them." 

Sir  N.  Knatchbull:  "With  leave  be  it  spoken,  I  am  still  of 
opinion  that  it  would  be  more  for  the  honour  of  the  church,  and 
for  the  [peace  and]  security  of  religion,  if  the  old  custom  could 
conveniently  be  restored." 

Dr.  Whitby :  "  It  were  to  be  wished  that  this  custom  [of  im- 
mersion] might  be  again  of  general  use." 

Dr.  Cave :  "  The  almost  constant  and  universal  custom  of  the 
primitive  times." 

Dr.  Towerson,  after  reciting  the  arguments  in  favour  of  im- 
mersion, in  his  explication,  makes,  for  a  Churchman,  the  follow- 
ing remarkable  concession : — 

"  How  to  take  off  the  force  of  these  arguments  altogether,  is 
a  thing  I  mean  not  to  consider ;  partly  because  our  church 
seems  to  persuade  such  an  immersion,  and  partly  because  I  can- 
not but  think  the  forementioned  arguments  to  be  so  far  of  force 
as  to  evince  the  necessity  thereof,  where  there  is  not  some 
greater  necessity  to*occasion  an  alteration  of  it." 

With  the  above  specimen,  selected  from  Dr.  Wall,  I  shall  con- 
elude  this  species  of  evidence.  With  regard,  however,  to  the 
introduction  of  sprinkling  and  affusion  into  Scotland,  England, 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  195 

and  consequently  into  America,  we  must  give  a  few  extracts  from 
his  4th  volume. 

Dr.  Wall  argues  the  cause  of  dipping,  and  the  necessity  of  the 
return  to  it,  on  various  occasions.  I  shall  give  but  one  extract, 
because  it  contains  much  of  the  history  of  sprinkling  in  a  few 
words: — 

"  That  our  climate  is  no  colder  than  it  was  for  those  thirteen 
or  fourteen  hundred  years  from  the  beginning  of  Christianity 
here,  to  Queen  Elizabeth's  time  ;  and  not  near  so  cold  as  Mus- 
covy, and  some  other  countries  where  they  do  still  dip  their 
children  in  baptism,  and  find  no  inconvenience  in  it. 

"  That  the  apparent  reason  that  altered  the  custom  was,  not 
the  coldness  of  the  climate,  but  the  imitation  of  Calvin  and  the 
church  of  Geneva,  and  some  others  thereabouts. 

"That  our  reformers  and  compilers  of  the  liturgy  (even  of  the 
last  edition  of  it)  were  of  another  mind.  As  appears  both  by 
the  express  order  of  the  rubric  itself,  and  by  the  prayer  used  just 
before  baptism,  '  Sanctify  this  water,'  &c.,  *  and  grant  that  this 
child  to  be  baptized  therein,'  &c.;  (if  they  had  meant  that  pour- 
ing should  have  always,  or  most  ordinarily  have  been  used,  they 
would  have  said  therewith;)  and  by  the  definition  given  in  the 
Catechism  of  the  outward  visible  sign  in  baptism :  *  Water, 
wherein  the  person  is  baptized.'  I  know  that  in  one  edition  it 
was  said,  '  is  dipped  or  sprinkled  with  it.'  I  know  not  the  his- 
tory of  that  edition  ;  but  as  it  is  a  late  one,  so  it  was  not  thought 
fit  to  be  continued.  The  old  edition  had  the  prayer  beforesaid 
in  these  words,  '  baptized  in  this  water.' 

"  That  if  it  be  the  coldness  of  the  air  that  is  feared  ;  a  child 
brought  in  loose  blankets,  that  may  be  presently  put  off  and  on, 
need  be  no  longer  naked,  or  very  little  longer  than  at  its  ordinary 
dressing  and  undressing;  not  a  quarter  or  sixth  part  of  a 
minute. 

"  If  the  coldness  of  the  water,  there  is  no  reason,  from  the  na- 
ture of  the  thing ;  no  order  or  command  of  God  or  man,  that  it 
should  be  used  cold  ;  but  as  the  waters,  in  which  our  Saviour 
and  the  primitive  Christians,  in  those  hot  countries  which  the 
Scripture  mentions,  were  baptized,  were  naturally  warm  by 
reason  of  the  climate :  so  if  ours  be  made  warm,  they  will  be  the 
liker  to  them.  As  the  inward  and  main  part  of  baptism  is 
God's  washing  and  sanctifying  the  soul,  so  the  outward  symbol 
is  the  washing  of  the  body,  which  is  as  naturally  done  by  warm 
water  as  cold.  It  may,  I  suppose,  be  used  in  such  a  degree  of 
warmth  as  the  parents  desire. 

"  As  to  those  of  the  clergy  who  are  satisfied  themselves,  and 
do  in  their  own  minds  and  opinions  approve  of  the  directions  of 
the  liturgy,  and  would  willingly  bring  their  people  to  the  use  of 
it ;  it  is  too  apparent  what  difficulties  lie  in  the  way.     So  that 


196  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

this  quarreller  has  no  ground  in  his  assuming  way  to  demand, 

*  Why  they  do  continue/  &c. 

**  The  difficulty  of  breaking  any  custom  which  has  got  posses- 
sion among  the  body  of  the  people,  (though  that  custom  be  but 
of  two  or  three  generations,)  is  known  and  obvious.  And  there 
being  a  necessity  of  leaving  it  to  the  parent's  judgment  whether 
their  child  may  well  endure  dipping  or  not,  they  are  very  apt  to 
think  or  say  not :  and  there  is  no  help  for  it.  For  none,  I  think, 
will  pretend  that  the  minister  should  determine  that,  and  dip 
the  child  whether  they  will  or  not.  He  can  but  give  his  opinion : 
the  judgment  must  be  theirs;  and  they  are  for  doing  as  has 
been  of  late  usual. 

"  But  there  are,  besides  this  general,  two  particular  obstacles, 
which  it  may  be  fit  to  mention. 

"  1.  One  is,  from  that  part  of  the  people  in  any  parish,  who  are 
pt^eshyterianly  inclined.  As  the  Puritan  party  brought  in  this  al- 
teration ;  so  they  are  very  tenacious  of  it;  and  as  in  other  church 
matters,  so  in  this  particularly,  they  seem  to  have  a  settled  an- 
tipathy against  the  retrieving  of  the  ancient  customs.  Calvin 
was,  I  think,  (as  I  said  in  my  book,)  the  first  in  the  world  that 
drew  up  a  form  of  liturgy  that  prescribed  pouring  water  on  the 
infant,  absolutely,  without  saying  any  thing  of  dipping.  It  was 
(as  Mr.  Walker  has  shown)  his  admirers  in  England,  who  in 
Queen  Elizabeth's  time  brought  pouring  in  ordinary  use,  which 
before  was  used  only  to  weak  children.  But  the  succeeding 
Presbyterians  in  England,  about  the  year  1644,  (when  their  reign 
began,)  went  farther  yet  from  the  ancient  way,  and  instead  of 
pouring,  brought  into  use  in  many  places  sjjrinJding :  declaring 
at  the  same  time  against  all  use  of  fonts,  baptisteries,  godfathers, 
or  any  thing  that  looked  like  the  ancient  way  of  baptizing.  And 
as  they  brought  the  use  of  the  other  sacrament  to  a  great  and 
shameful  infrequency,  (which  it  is  found  difficult  to  this  day  to 
reform,)  so  they  brought  this  of  baptism  into  a  great  disregard. 
Now  I  say,  a  minister  in  a  parish,  wliere  there  are  any  consi- 
derable number  inclined,  this  way,  will  find  in  them  a  great  aver- 
sion to  this  order  of  the  rubric.  They  are  hardly  prevailed  on 
to  leave  ofi"  that  scandalous  custom  of  having  their  children, 
though  never  so  well,  baptized  out  of  a  basin  or  porringer  in  a 
bed-chamber,  hardly  persuaded  to  bring  them  to  church ;  much 
farther  from  having  them  dipped,  though  never  so  able  to  en- 
dure it. 

"  2.  Another  struggle  will  be  with  the  midwives  and  nurses, 
&c.  These  will  use  all  the  interest  they  have  with  the  mothers, 
(which  is  very  great,)  to  dissuade  them  from  agreeing  to  the 
dipping  of  the  child.  I  know  no  particular  reason,  unless  it  be 
this.  A  thing  which  they  value  themselves  and  their  skill  much 
upon  is,  the  neat  dressing  of  the  child  on  the  christening  day ; 
the  setting  all  the  trimming,  the  pins,  and  the  lacea  in  their 


ACTION   OP  BAPTISM.  197 

right  order.  And  if  the  child  be  brought  in  loose  clothes,  which 
may  presently  be  taken  off  for  the  baptism,  and  put  on  again, 
this  pride  is  lost.  And  this  makes  a  reason.  So  little  is  the 
solemnity  of  the  sacrament  regarded  by  many,  who  mind  no- 
thing but  the  dress,  and  the  eating  and  drinking.  But  the  mi- 
nister must  endeavour  to  prevail  vrith  some  of  his  people  who 
have  the  most  regard  for  religion,  and  possibly  their  example 
may  bring  in  the  rest.'^ 

The  history  of  sprinkling  water  on  men,  women,  or  babes,  is 
without  any  authority  from  Old  Testament  or  New.  Neither 
the  Jews'  religion  nor  Christianity  ever  required  or  approved  it. 
It  has  no  more  authority  from  the  Bible  than  transubstantiation, 
auricular  confession,  purgatory,  celibacy,  or  the  worship  of  an- 
gels and  demi-god  mediators. 

In  the  history  of  Christianity,  the  whole  world.  Eastern  and 
AVestern  Christendom,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  sick  and 
dying  persons,  practised  immersion  during  the  long  space  of 
thirteen  hundred  years.  Since  that  time,  license  was  granted 
first  by  the  Pope,  in  1311,  to  practise  affusion  with  the  autho- 
rity of  the  church.  Calvin  next  gave  a  law  to  his  branch  of 
the  church,  authorizing  affusion.  This  was  carried  first  into 
Scotland,  and  then  into  England,  after  the  reign  of  Mary  of 
bloody  memory ;  and  finally  imposed  upon  the  people,  much 
against  their  own  conviction  and  inclination  at  first.  Time, 
however,  reconciled  them  to  it ;  and  it  was  not  often  necessary 
to  fine  and  punish  them  for  neglect  of  duty,  as  it  once  was  in 
our  good  Episcopalian  Commonwealth  of  Virginia,  as  the  fol- 
loT\'ing  penal  statute,  lamentably  for  the  honour  of  our  fore- 
fathers, too  amply  witnesseth : — 

Copy  of  a  law,  found  in  Henninfs  Statutes  at  large,  vol.  2, 
page  165.     Dec.  1662,  Uth  Charles  11. 

*'  Article  III. — Against  persons  that  refuse  to  have  their  chil- 
dren baptized. 

*'  Whereas  many  schismatical  persons,  out  of  their  averseness 
to  the  orthodox  established  religion,  or  out  of  the  newfangled 
conceits  of  their  own  heretical  inventions,  refuse  to  have  their 
children  baptized — 

''Be  it  therefore  enacted,  hj  the  authority  aforesaid,  That  all 
persons  that,  in  contempt  of  the  divine  sacrament  of  baptism, 
shall  refuse,  when  they  may  carry  their  child  to  a  lawful  minis- 
ter in  that  county,  to  have  them  baptized,  shall  be  amerced  in 
two  thousand  pounds  of  tobacco — halfe  to  the  informer,  and 
halfe  to  the  publique." 

17* 


198  ACTION   OP  BAPTISM. 

A  few  such  statutes  would  soon  make  infant  sprinkling  hoih. 
orthodox  and  popular. 

The  largest  half  of  Christendom,  as  respects  territory,  includ- 
ing all  Asia,  all  Africa,  much  of  the  north  of  Europe,  still  prac- 
tise immersion — indeed,  all  Christendom,  as  Wall  says,  that 
never  bowed  to  the  throne  of  the  Pope  of  Rome. 

AVith  this  Virginian  statute,  I  shall  conclude  this  mere  sketch 
of  the  introduction,  progress,  and  prevalence  of  sprinkling  in 
the  western  section  of  the  Christian  profession.  Were  it  not 
for  a  gross  imposition,  some  way  practised  upon  western  and 
Protestant  Christendom — that  immersion  is  a  thing  of  yester- 
day, and  limited  to  a  few  hundred  thousand  Baptists  ;  and  that 
sprinkling  and  pouring  have  been  always  and  almost  univer- 
sally in  popular  faith  and  practice, — I  should  not  have  supposed 
it  of  much  importance  to  pause  in  the  way  of  comment  upon 
the  facts  now  clearly  lying  before  us.  But,  in  view  of  this 
most  unfounded  and  fallacious  assumption,  I  deem  it  incumbent 
on  me  to  fix  the  attention  of  the  community  upon  this  volu- 
minous and  instructive,  and  incontrovertible  fact. 

I  have  not  used,  in  this  branch  of  the  argument,  more  than 
in  the  preceding  part  of  it,  any  ex  parte  witnesses ;  unless,  in- 
deed, the  universal  repudiation  of  Baptist  testimony  and  the 
constant  listening  to  Pedobaptist  should  be  regarded  as  prefer- 
ring one-sided  evidence.  But,  I  presume  the  Pedobaptists,  if 
not  the  Baptists,  will  forgive  me  this  wrong.  That  I  have  re- 
pudiated a  respectable  multitude  of  faithful  and  competent 
vouchers  from  giving  testimony,  merely  because  they  are  on 
my  side,  is,  indeed,  not  treating  our  friends  so  kindly  and  re- 
spectfully as  our  opposers ;  still,  I  opine,  it  is  the  shorter  and 
the  safer,  and,  therefore,  the  better  way  of  conducting  the  con- 
troversy. 

If,  then,  the  Apostles  authorized  and  allowed  sprinkling  pri- 
vately, as  some  few  of  our  opponents  assume,  in  that  case  it 
would  be  preferable  to  the  custom  of  immersion  ;  because,  Ist, 
it  is  a  matter  of  no  self-denial  or  trouble  to  have  a  wet  finger 
pressed  upon  one's  brow,  or  a  few  drops  sprinkled  upon  the 
check  ;  and,  2d,  because  it  would  have  been  just  as  pleasing  to 
the  Lord  as  immersion,  inasmuch  as  he  is  always  pleased  with 
his  own  appointments,  and  most  cheerfully  accepts  the  obe- 
dience which  he  requires.  It  is,  indeed,  a  most  unprecedented 
case  of  divine  legislation,  that  the  Lord  ghould  command  and 


ACTION   OP  BAPTISM.  199 

authorize  two  actions,  so  very  diverse  in  form  and  significance, 
to  be  performed  by  his  own  direct  authority,  and  then  call  them 
by  one  and  the  same  name.  Be  it  so,  however,  that  he  was 
pleased  to  sanction  privately  one  such  anomaly ;  I  ask,  on  the 
principles  that  govern  human  nature,  and  from  the  customs  and 
history  of  the  world,  how  it  could  so  soon  have  degenerated 
from  affusion  to  immersion,  and  in  so  short  a  time  become  so 
universal,  that  not  one  instance  of  sprinkling  is  found  on  record, 
either  in  the  New  Testament  or  in  ecclesiastical  history,  for  the 
first  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  ?  Men  generally  degenerate 
from  hard  and  grievous  exactions  to  those  which  are  lighter  and 
more  agreeable ;  but,  on  the  assumption  before  us,  as  Bishop 
Smith  of  Kentucky  argues,  the  whole  church  immediately  aban- 
doned the  easy  and  light  service  of  sprinkling  for  immersion  I 
When  God  formerly  asked  the  fat  and  costly  sacrifices  of  the 
flocks  of  Jacob  for  his  altar  and  his  priesthood,  the  ungrateful 
Israelites  in  a  few  centuries  so  far  degenerated  as  to  offer  only 
the  poor  and  worthless.  But  in  this  case,  when  he  asks  for  a 
dove  or  a  sparrow,  they  degenerate  to  a  full-grown  ox  or  a 
heifer !  I  should  be  pleased  to  hear  some  ingenious  essayist 
attempt  an  explanation  of  this  singular  anomaly.  Till  satisfac- 
torily explained,  we  must,  however,  continue  to  regard  it  as  a 
most  unfeasible  assumption,  destitute  of  any,  the  least  proba- 
bility. 

We  have,  then,  but  one  case  of  pouring  on  record  during  two 
hundred  and  fifty  years.  The  Messiah  was  gone  to  heaven  more 
than  two  centuries  before  the  sick  and  distracted  Novatian,  of 
Eome,  had  water  poured  all  over  him  on  a  bed ; — if,  indeed,  as 
Eusebius  says,  that  could  be  called  baptism.  Perhaps  there 
may  have  been,  about  that  time,  a  few  others  ;  but  so  few  and 
so  obscure,  (if  there  were  any,)  that  neither  Eusebius  nor  any 
other  historian  names  them. 

The  Council  of  Neocaesarea,  sixty-four  years  after  this  time, 
condemned  such  pourings,  which,  being  the  first  public  notice 
of  the  affair,  proves  that  it  had  not  yet  spread  far,  and,  in  the 
second  place,  that  it  was  not  then  regarded  by  the  bishops  with 
much  favour. 

The  delicacy  of  infants,  the  fond  and  foolish  tenderness  of 
superstitious  mothers,  the  notion  of  the  deadly  influence  of  origi- 
nal sin,  the  importance  of  baptism  as  an  ablution,  and  the  sick 
and  dying  invalids  that  could  not  endure  immersion,  one  would 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

think,  would  have  earlier  made  larger  inroads  upon  the  Apos- 
tolic law  and  ordinances,  and  prevailed  more  extensively  than 
it  seems  they  did. 

The  facts  then  are,  the  whole  world  immersed,  with  these  few 
exceptions,  for  thirteen  centuries.  The  east  half  of  Christendom 
Btill  continues  the  practice.  The  Greek  portion  of  the  church 
never  to  this  day  has  given  up  the  primitive  practice. 

This,  too,  is  an  argument  of  more  weight  that  even  the  nu- 
merical magnitude  of  this  immense  section  of  the  church.  It  is 
not  merely  the  voice  of  many  millions,  but  the  voice  of  many 
millions  of  Greeks  ; — of  men  who  knew  what  Apostles  and  Greek 
fathers  had  written;  who  needed  no  translators,  nor  scholiasts, 
nor  annotators,  nor  historians,  to  read  them  lessons  on  the  pri- 
mitive practice  or  on  the  meaning  of  Christ's  commission. 
Some  seventy-five  or  a  hundred  millions  of  such  vouchers  on  a 
mere  question  of  fact,  qualified  as  they  were,  on  the  mere  prin- 
ciple of  human  authority,  would  outweigh  the  world. 

But,  even  when  the  Council  of  Ravenna  granted  to  Franoe 
and  the  Papal  territory  the  privilege  of  afi'usion,  it  is  not  to  be 
concluded  that  the  millions  of  Germany,  France,  Spain,  Portu- 
gal, Italy,  and  England  immediately  accepted  of  the  indulgence. 
They  did  not.  France  herself  did  not.  England  held  on  for 
three  centuries  more  to  immersion ; — so  did  some  other  portions 
of  eastern  Europe  ;  and  one  portion  of  the  Roman  church  holds 
on  to  this  day  to  the  old  apostolic  custom.  We  have,  then,  a 
tremendous  majority,  if  that  is  of  any  value : — the  whole  church 
for  thirteen  hundred  years  ;  the  half  of  it  for  eighteen  hundred 
years  ;  and  of  the  balance,  some  portions  of  it  for  fourteen  hun- 
dred, and  one  large  portion  for  sixteen  hundred  years. 

Concerning  the  magnitude  of  the  Greek  church,  compared 
with  the  Roman,  we  learn  much  from  the  fact,  that  during  the 
first  seven  general  councils,  the  aggregate  of  Greek  bishops  was 
some  twenty-two  thousand,  while  that  of  the  Roman  bishops 
was  less  than  thirty  !  But  there  is  a  very  plain  and  tolerably 
accurate  way  of  ascertaining  the  comparative  number  of  those 
immersed  and  sprinkled  in  all  time.  We  have,  first,  all  Chris- 
tendom for  thirteen  centuries,  and  half  of  it  for  five. 

Now,  allow  an  average  of  one  hundred  millions  every  third  of 
a  century  to  have  been  baptized,  which  is  certainly  within  the 
limits  of  the  actual  number,  (but  it  will  show  the  ratios  just  as 
well  aa  the  true  number,)  then  wo  have  for  eighteen  centuries, 


ACTION  OP  BAPTISM.  201 

in  all,  five  thousand  five  hundred  millions ;  of  this  number,  four 
thousand  millions  were  immersed  during  the  first  thirteen  cen- 
turies. Then  we  have  the  one-half  of  five  centuries,  which  is 
seven  hundred  and  fifty  millions,  added  to  four  thousand  mil- 
lions,— giving  an  aggregate  of  four  thousand  seven  hundred  and 
fifty  millions  immersed,  for  seven  hundred  and  fifty  millions 
sprinkled,  during  all  the  ages  of  Christianity  ;  that  is,  in  the 
ratio  of  seven  immersed  to  one  sprinkled.  In  making  this  esti- 
mate, we  have  given  all  that  have  been  immersed  in  the  western 
half  of  Christendom  for  the  last  five  hundred  years,  to  compen- 
sate for  all  the  clinics  that  were  sprinkled  during  the  first  thir- 
teen centuries.  After  making  the  most  reasonable  deductions 
which  can  be  demanded,  we  have  an  immense  majority  of  im- 
mersed professors,  compared  with  the  sprinkled.  This  argu- 
ment is  not  urged  in  proof  of  the  truth  of  our  positions,  but  as 
a  refutation  of  those  who  would  represent  immersion  as  a  small 
affair,  in  the  esteem  of  all  ages,  compared  with  sprinkling. 

In  displaying  the  documentary  evidence  of  the  universality  of 
immersion  in  the  early  ages  of  Christianity,  and  of  the  opinions 
of  learned  men  on  the  question  of  the  baptismal  practice  of  the 
church  in  all  ages,  we  have  dealt  rather  with  a  sparing  hand. 
We  could  fill  a  respectable  volume  with  concessions,  confessions, 
and  candid  acknowledgments  from  the  greatest  Pedobaptist 
names  of  Christendom;  but,  really,  it  seems  to  us  a  work  of 
supererogation.  After  such  men  as  Mosheim,  Waddington, 
Geiseler,  Neander,  Brenner,  Cave,  Taylor,  Baxter,  Usher,  and 
Grotius,  of  the  modern  witnesses ; — after  such  admissions  on 
the  part  of  Stuart  and  Wall,  from  their  extensive  readings ; — all 
declaring  the  ancient  practice,  for  so  many  centuries,  to  be  the 
almost  universal  practice  of  the  church,  why  should  we  summon 
a  hundred  others  to  tell  the  same  story,  and  to  reiterate  the  same 
facts  ?  Like  Wall,  we  might  fill  several  volumes  with  such  de- 
tails. But,  may  we  not  say,  that  if  any  one  hear  not  these  evi- 
dences, they  would  not  be  persuaded  though  they  were  multi- 
plied a  thousand-fold ! 

I  do  not  quote  the  Koran  to  prove  that  the  Mohammedans  so 
render  and  understand  baptism,  though  I  could  have  done  it ; 
nor  do  I  refer  to  the  frequent  immersions  enjoined  in  the  Mo- 
hammedan code ;  nor  did  I  tell  how  many  conveniences  there 
were  for  practising  immersion  either  in  the  brook  Kedron,  at 
the  pool  of  Bethesda,  being,  according  to  Maundrel,  several 


202  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

hundred  feet  long  and  broad,  and  eight  feet  deep,  or  at  thd 
private  and  public  baths  all  over  Judea ;  nor  have  I  gone  to 
Philippi,  nor  to  the  baptisteries  of  ancient  renown, — not  even 
that  of  St.  Sophia,  erected  by  Constantine,  with  its  immense 
convocation-room,  large  enough  for  an  oecumenical  council ;  nor 
have  1  told  of  the  famous  Lateran  baptistery,  once  bestowed  by 
Constantine  to  Sylvester,  bishop  of  Rome ;  nor  of  the  baptistery 
of  Ravenna,  with  its  octangular  edifice  of  two  hundred  and 
thirty  English  feet  square ;  nor  have  I  named  the  baptistery  at 
Florence,  remarkable  for  its  numerous  baths ;  nor  have  I  told 
of  the  thousand  baths  of  Robinson ;  nor  gone  into  the  proof  of 
the  proposition  that  baths  were  as  common  in  the  East  as  bake- 
ovens  in  Pennsylvania ;  neither  have  I  given  long  accounts  of 
the  immersion  of  many  kings,  and  queens,  and  princesses,  from 
Elizabeth  back  to  Constantine  the  Great ;  nor  have  I  alluded  to 
a  score  of  little  things  usually  introduced  to  substantiate  the 
testimony  given ; — all  of  which,  after  what  I  have  said  and  cited, 
appears  about  as  superfluous,  unnecessary,  and,  I  might  add,  as 
ridiculous,  too,  as  if,  after  proving,  by  twelve  of  the  most  vera- 
cious witnesses  ever  sworn,  that  A  B  was  actually  drowned  with- 
in one  mile  of  Jerusalem,  I  should  then  summon  a  few  travellers 
that  had  sometimes  visited  Jerusalem,  to  say  that  there  was 
actually  water  deep  enough  to  drown  A  B,  within  one  mile  of 
the  city ! 

Nor  have  I  quoted  Milton  and  all  the  old  poets,  to  prove  from 
their  sayings  and  allusions  that  they  all  admitted  immersion  to 
have  been  found  either  in  baptizo  or  in  history  ;  nor  even  half 
of  the  great  men  now  living :  I  have  not  introduced  the  great 
German  Tholuck,  on  Rom.  vi.  4,  saying,  "In  order  to  under- 
stand the  figurative  use  of  baptism,  we  must  bear  in  mind  the 
WELL-KNOWN  FACT,  that  the  Candidate,  in  the  primitive  church, 
was  immersed  in  water  and  raised  out  again ;"  nor  have  I  intro- 
duced Urner,  saying,  "that,  in  the  apostolic  age,  baptism  was 
by  immersion,  as  its  symbolic  action  shows  ;"  nor  Belchneider, 
in  his  Theology,  saying,  "Immersion  was  the  original  apostolic 
practice  ;"  nor  Starck,  nor  Guericke,  nor  Ilahn,  nor  Von  Coeller, 
nor  Frilsch, — all  affirming  the  same,  in  words  either  tantamount 
or  paramount. 

Nor  have  I  been  peculiarly  attentive  to  the  removal  of  the 
little  objections  made  by  great  men,  on  numerous  accounts,  to 
the  difficulties  of  immersing  three  thousand  in  one  day — as  if 


ACTION   OP  BAPTISM.  20B 

immersion  required  twice  as  long  time  as  sprinkling,  which  no 
one  of  experimental  knowledge  would  believe,  for  sixty  persona 
have  often  been  immersed  by  one  person  in  one  hour ;  nor  have 
I,  from  this  fact,  repudiated  the  custom  of  long  narrations  of 
Christian  experience  prior  to  immersion,  though  the  argument 
is  irresistible : — three  thousand  persons  in  one  day  enlightened, 
convinced,  converted,  declare  their  faith  and  penitence,  relate 
their  experience,  and  are  immersed  in  some  six  or  eight  hours ; 
nor  have  I  at  all  adverted  to  the  great  difficulty  of  finding  water 
at  all  seasons  and  in  all  places,  as  if  a  man  could  live  long  in 
any  country  where  he  could  not  find  water  enough  to  cover 
him, — or,  as  if  the  Lord  would  condemn  any  man  for  not  doing 
what,  at  a  particular  day  or  in  a  particular  place,  was  physi- 
cally impossible ;  as  if  men  would  not  have  as  much  sense  now- 
a-days  as  in  old  times,  when  they  went  out  of  one  place  to  another 
to  be  baptized,  on  various  accounts  besides  scarcity  of  water ; 
nor  yet  have  I  shown  that  Philippi  was  situated  upon  a  river, 
and  Corinth  between  two  seas ;  and  that  there  was  not  a  church 
constituted  in  the  apostolic  age,  known  to  history,  that  had  not 
within  its  precincts,  or  in  its  vicinity,  baths,  public  and  private, 
rivers  or  pools  of  water,  adequate  to  all  the  requisites  of  Chris- 
tian immersion. 

The  reason  why  I  have  not  attempted  all  this,  is,  because 
such  an  eJOTort  on  my  part  would  be  wholly  gratuitous.  For,  if 
John  the  Harbinger  baptized  our  Lord  in  the  Jordan ;  if  all 
Jerusalem,  Judea,  and  the  circumjacent  country  went  out  to 
him,  confessed  their  sins,  and  were  baptized  by  him  in  the  Jor- 
dan ;  if  John  baptized  at  Enon,  near  to  Salem,  because  there 
was  much  water  there  ;  if  an  Ethiopian  officer  went  down  into 
the  water,  in  the  desert,  and  came  up  out  of  the  water,  when 
baptized  by  Philip ;  and  if  the  first  Christians  were  all  buried 
with  the  Lord  in  baptism ; — follows  it  not,  that  neither  sprink- 
ling nor  pouring  is  Christian  immersion,  or  Christian  baptism  ? 

Nay,  if  in  a  single  case  it  were  clearly  shown  that  any  one, 
in  the  act  of  Christian  baptism,  had  been  immersed,  follows  it 
not  that  in  every  case  Christian  baptism  was  Christian  immer- 
sion? unless,  indeed,  there  are  two  Christian  baptisms!  But 
this  is  inadmissible  ;  inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  Paul,  has 
said,  that  "  there  is  one  Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism."  As 
rationally,  therefore,  might  any  one  plead  for  two  Lords  and 
two  faiths  as  for  two  baptisms. 


SOi  ACTION  OP  BAPTISM. 

To  conclude,  then,  on  all  the  premises  submitted  in  this  book, 
I  must  say,  that  it  appears  to  me  as  congruous  with  good  sense, 
good  learning,  and  good  taste  to  affirm  that  a  person  can  be  im- 
mersed by  sprinkling  or  by  pouring — or  poured  or  sprinkled  by 
immersion,  as  that  he  can  be  baptized  by  either  the  one  or  the 
other. 


BOOK   THIRD. 
Subjects  of  i^aptiem* 

CHAPTER  I. 

SUBJECTS  OF  John's  baptism. 

The  action  called  baptism,  so  far  as  judged  convenient  and 
necessary,  has  been  ascertained.  A  miniature  view,  while  it  is 
more  portable  and  convenient,  may  be  as  true  and  faithful  to  the 
original  as  one  large  as  life.  There  is  sometimes  as  much  argu- 
ment in  a  page  as  in  a  volume — in  a  sheet  as  in  an  octavo.  The 
age  of  folios  and  quartos  has  passed  away.  Men  of  reflection 
know  that  many  words  and  long  sentences  are  not  always  ar- 
guments. In  an  age  of  books,  like  the  present,  a  tract  may  be 
read  while  a  treatise  may  be  neglected ;  and,  therefore,  may  be 
made  more  useful  than  a  volume. 

We  now  propose  a  miniature  view  of  the  subject  of  baptism, 
or  the  person  that  ought  to  be  baptized.  A  million  of  pages 
could  not  convince  a  certain  class  of  men  on  any  subject  to 
which  they  are  already  committed.  They  love  to  have  it  so : 
they  will  have  it  so ;  and,  therefore,  it  is  so.  Our  hopes  gene- 
rally terminate  upon  the  uncommitted — ^the  candid  and  the  inqui- 
sitive for  truth.  For  their  sake,  and  with  an  almost  single  eye 
to  their  illumination  and  rescue  from  error,  we  select  arguments 
and  authorities,  both  as  respects  variety  and  number.  To  this 
class  we  now  propound  the  question.  Who  of  mankind  have  a 
right  to  receive  the  blessing  of  Christian  baptism  ? 

Before  tendering  an  answer  to  the  important  question,  Who 
ought  to  be  baptized,  it  will  be  expedient  to  inquire  to  what  dis- 
pensation or  institution  of  religion  this  solemn  and  significant 
ordinance  belongs.  Our  most  reformed  standards  of  Protestant- 
ism affirm,  with  the  Westminster  Confession,  that  "  baptism  is  an 
ordinance  of  the  New  Testament ;"  and,  consequently,  belonged 
not  to  the  Patriarchal  or  Jewish  institution  of  religion.  This  is 
18  205 


206  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

a  very  important  decision  of  a  very  leading  question  bearing  di- 
rectly and  forcibly  on  the  great  subject  of  investigation. 

But  we  may  be  asked,  What  importance  is  attached  to  the  fact 
that  it  is  a  New  Testament  ordinance  ?  The  fact  that  there  is  an 
Old  and  New  Testament,  an  obsolete  and  an  existing  divine  in- 
stitution, is  pregnant  with  very  important  results  and  bearings 
as  respects  both  duty  and  privilege.  A  new  Testament  or  a  new 
Will  makes  a  prior  one  of  no  binding  influence  or  importance. 
Paul  thus  reasons  in  his  letter  to  the  Hebrews.  His  words  are, 
**  In  that  God  saith,  I  will  make  a  new  institution,  or  testament, 
he  hath  made  the  first  old ;"  that  is,  obsolete.  "Still,  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, being  the  mould  or  type  of  the  New,  may  be  of  much 
value  to  us,  even  although  it  ceases  to  be  binding.  If  the  shell 
of  an  antediluvian  fish  increases  our  knowledge  of  physical  na- 
ture, why  may  not  the  moulds  and  types  of  the  Jews'  religion, 
in  which  our  Christian  institution  was  once  enveloped,  increase 
our  knowledge  of  that  institution  ? 

God  has  generally  presented  a  picture  to  the  eye  as  well  as  a 
word  to  the  ear,  in  revealing  his  purposes  and  designs  to  the  human 
race.  To  look  into  the  Patriarchal  and  the  Jewish  institutions 
through  the  developments  of  the  Christian  religion,  is,  therefore, 
of  much  importance,  both  as  respects  the  enlargement  of  our 
knowledge  and  the  confirmation  of  our  faith.  To  myself,  as  to 
many  other  students  of  the  Bible,  it  is  demonstrably  evident  that 
God  has  from  the  beginning  of  time  been  arranging  the  promi- 
nent characters  and  incidents  in  human  history  and  the  leading 
events  of  his  own  moral  government  and  providence  in  such  a 
way  as  to  create  faith  in  his  testimony,  and  to  illustrate  and 
render  more  intelligible  the  mysteries  of  Christ  and  his  gospel. 
To  glance  at  a  few  of  these,  with  a  reference  to  the  subject  on 
hand,  may  not  be  without  some  interest  and  advantage  to  the 
inquirer  after  the  proper  subject  of  baptism. 

Placing,  then,  before  us  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Scriptures, 
or  the  Oracles  of  God  committed  to  the  Jews  and  those  com- 
mitted to  the  Christians,  we  discover  in  them  the  following  sin- 
gular coincidences : — Each  has  its  Adam,  its  constitution,  its 
special  community,  its  Mediator,  its  precepts,  its  promises,  its 
privileges,  its  rewards,  its  punishments.  Hence  the  frequency 
with  which  these  arc  placed  in  contrast  by  the  authors  of  the 
volume  containing  the  Christian  Scriptures. 

In  the  apostolic  writings  we  have  two  Adams  contrasted — the 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  '  207 

first  and  the  second,  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly.  We  fell  in 
the  first,  we  rise  in  the  second.  There  are  two  chief  covenants — 
the  first  and  the  second,  the  old  and  the  new  ;  two  Mediators — 
Moses  of  the  first,  and  the  Lord  Messiah  of  the  second ;  two 
communities — the  Jewish  and  the  Christian ;  two  births — that 
of  the  flesh  and  that  of  the  Spirit ;  two  positive  precepts — cir- 
cumcision and  baptism  ;  two  classes  of  promises — the  one  tem- 
poral, the  other  spiritual :  two  inheritances — one  in  Canaan  and 
one  in  heaven. 

But  as  the  first  existed  for  the  sake  of  the  second,  and  as  the 
points  of  shadow  and  substance,  of  type  and  antitype,  are  nu- 
merous and  various,  the  prominent  characteristics,  designs,  and 
tendencies  of  these  two  divine  institutions  are  set  in  order  before 
us  and  pictured  out  in  several  conspicuous  and  remarkable  per- 
sons, events,  and  circumstances.  To  these  also  we  shall  briefly 
allude  as  preparatory  to  a  proper  development  of  the  question 
before  us. 

There  are  several  public  persons,  such  as  Adam,  Abraham, 
Isaac,  Jacob,  with  their  families,  made  to  stand  in  a  double  po- 
sition to  mankind — as  natural  progenitors  of  the  race,  and  as 
typical  or  spiritual  persons.  Adam  was  the  father  and  repre- 
sentative of  the  whole  human  race.  From  him  we  have  all  in- 
herited both  life  and  death.  We  all  live  because  he  lived ;  we 
die,  because,  as  our  representative,  he  sinned.  His  two  sons, 
Cain  and  Abel,  represent  two  seeds  or  races  of  men.  Cain  was 
a  man  and  a  murderer,  and  Abel  was  a  saint  and  a  martyr. 
Seth  takes  Abel's  place,  and  his  descendants  remain  for  seventy 
generations,  till  the  Messiah  appears.  Cain's  ofispring  perished 
in  the  flood. 

Abraham,  of  all  the  sons  of  Seth,  was  the  most  illustrious 
personage  down  to  the  times  of  the  Messiah.  He  was  consti- 
tuted "  the  Father  of  the  Faithful,"  and  his  faith  the  model  faith 
of  the  family  of  God.  He  had  two  sons — one  by  nature  and  one 
by  faith.  The  mother  of  the  first  was  a  slave — of  the  last,  a  free 
woman.  The  two  women  represent  the  two  covenants,  and  their 
two  sons  the  two  communities  under  them.*  One  of  these  sons 
was  "  born  after  the  flesh,"  the  other  "  after  the  spirit,"  or  by 
faith.  Two  families  spring  from  these — the  Ishmaelites  and  the 
Israelites.    But  Isaac  was  the  person  from  whom  the  promised 

*  Gal.  iv. 


208  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

Benefactor  and  Redeemer  of  the  world  was  to  come.  "  In  Isaac 
shall  thy  seed  be  called."  Isaac  became  a  father :  he  has  two 
sons,  and  only  two — Esau  j  and  Jacob.  Jacob  is  converted  into 
Israel,  while  from  Esau  the  Edomites  descend.  To  Ishmael 
Abraham  gave  a  loaf  of  bread  and  a  bottle  of  water ;  to  Isaac, 
all  his  estate.  To  Esau  God  gave  Mount  Seir ;  to  Israel, 
Canaan,  for  an  inheritance. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  of  these  three  most  remarkable 
persons, — Adam,  Abraham,  and  Isaac, — the  first  born  sons  were 
only  born  after  the  flesh,  and  lived  after  the  flesh ;  while  their 
second  born  sons  were  born  after  the  Spirit,  and  lived  according 
to  the  Spirit.  "  Howbeit,"  said  Paul,  "  that  was  not  first  which 
was  spiritual,  but  that  which  is  natural,  and  afterwards  that 
which  is  spiritual."  Of  the  first  class  were  Cain,  Ishmael,  and 
Esau ;  of  the  second,  Abel,  Isaac,  and  Israel. 

Such  were  the  original  elements,  the  mystic  alphabet  of  spiri- 
tual things,  as  time  in  its  evolutions  afterwards  developed.  The 
typical  nation  is  created  out  of  the  flesh  of  Isaac,  according  to 
what  God  had  said  to  Abraham — "  In  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be 
called."  Hence  the  fortunes  of  Jacob  and  his  sons  are  spread 
out  before  us  from  that  day  until  the  Messiah  is  born,  to  the 
comparative  obscuration  and  disparagement  of  every  other  na- 
tion and  people. 

They  became  "a  nation,  great,  and  mighty,  and  populous," 
and  are  placed  under  the  special  wing  of  Jehovah  as  their  King. 
Their  males  are  marked  in  the  flesh  by  a  special  covenant  en- 
tered into  in  the  99th  of  Abraham,  one  year  before  Isaac  was 
"born.     Hence  Isaac  was  born  in  circumcision. 

AVhile  on  their  way  from  Egypt  to  Canaan,  they  are  consti- 
tuted into  a  holy  nation,  a  kingdom  of  priests ;  not  spiritually 
holy,  indeed,  but  holy  as  respected  the  jlesli.  Hence  the  free 
use  of  the  term  hohj  in  its  application  to  that  people.  Their 
camp,  their  tabernacle,  with  all  its  furniture, — their  priesthood, 
with  all  its  appurtenances,  as  well  as  their  persons,  were  sepa- 
rated, sanctified,  or  made  holy  to  the  Lord. 

It  is  at  Sinai  that  ^Moses  appears  as  a  mediator.  It  is  there 
that  the  natural  seed,  the  inheritance,  and  a  special  relation  to 
God,  are  engrossed  in  one  great  politico-ecclesiastic  institution. 
These  three  are  now  imbodied  in  one  covenant  and  solemnly 
ratified. 

The  seed  of  Abraham  had  now  multiplied  into  millions,  but 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  209 

the  promised  seed  was  not  yet  come.  While  the  flesh  of  the 
Messiah  is  in  the  nation,  it  must  continue  under  a  theocracy. 
It  must  be  under  the  special  care  and  direction  of  God.  Its  in- 
stitutions must  all  be  mystic,  while  the  Messiah  is  hid  in  the 
family  of  Abraham. 

The  new  birth  was  represented  by  a  "  baptism  into  Moses,  in 
the  cloud,  and  in  the  sea."  The  mystic  manna,  or  "  the  bread 
OF  LIFE,"  was  concealed  under  the  covert  of  the  manna  that  daily 
fell  around  their  dwellings.  The  stricken  Rock,  whence  issued 
a  living  stream,  was  to  them  Christ.  The  cloud  which  over- 
shadowed them  by  day  and  illuminated  them  by  night,  which 
guided  and  protected  them  through  the  wilderness,  was  to  them 
what  the  Holy  Spirit  is  to  Christians  in  all  his  influences  through 
his  word  and  ordinances.  Their  whole  pilgrimage  through  the 
desert  is  a  picturesque  representation  of  human  life  under  a 
remedial  system.  Death  was  shadowed  forth  in  their  Jordan, 
and  heaven  itself  in  their  Canaan.  "  The  things  that  happened 
unto  them  happened  unto  them  for  types,  and  they  are  written 
for  our  admonition,  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world"  (the 
consummation  of  that  dispensation)  "  have  come." 

The  long-promised  and  joyfully  anticipated  hour  arrives — the 
**  fulness  of  time"  has  come — the  proper  offspring  of  the  woman 
appears.  His  harbinger  anticipates  him  by  a  few  months.  In 
proper  time  he  announces  his  appearance.  He  proclaims  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,  and  prepares  a  people  for  his  reign. 
He  commences  in  the  bosom  of  the  Jewish  church.  He  strikes 
at  their  cardinal  errors,  in  theory  and  practice.  He  says, 
"  Think  not  to  say  you  have  Abraham  for  your  father."  He 
repudiates  all  reliance  upon  the  fiesh,  "  God,"  said  he,  "  can 
raise,  of  these  inanimate  stones,  sons  to  Abraham."  "  Keform," 
continues  he,  **  for  the  Reign  of  Heaven  approaches."  He  as- 
sures his  countrymen  that  the  day  of  excision  and  destruction 
was  nigh  to  all  them  that  trusted  in  the  flesh.  To  use  his  own 
words,  "  the  axe"  then  lay  at  the  root  of  every  barren  tree.  The 
fatal  blow  was  about  to  be  inflicted  upon  them,  that  would  con- 
vert them  into  fuel.  He  announces,  in  very  intelligible  words, 
that  his  immediate  successor,  whose  way  he  was  preparing, 
would  immerse  the  people  in  fire  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  They 
should  all  be  immersed  into  their  respective  tenets.  Those  who 
received  the  Messiah  should  be  immersed  into  the  Holy  Spirit ; 
and  those  who  did  not  would  be  cast  into  fire :  for  so  the  con- 
18* 


210  SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

text  defines  the  subjects  of  the  two  baptisms — that  of  tTie  Spirit 
and  that  of  the  jire.  Hence  the  ministry  of  John;  both  his 
preaching  and  baptism  are  indicative  of  a  new  organization 
upon  another  principle  than  that  of  the  Jewish  organization. 
Fleshly  connection  with  Abraham,  or  with  any  antecedent  cove- 
nant would  not  be  to  any  one  a  passport  into  the  new  associ- 
ation. A  new  faith  and  a  new  repentance  are  now  proposed  as 
the  basis  of  a  new  ecclesiastical  institution.  The  Jews,  as  a  na- 
tion, expected  a  Messiah ;  but,  as  a  nation,  they  rejected  Jesus 
as  that  Messiah.  Hence,  as  a  national  community,  they  ceased 
to  be  God's  holy  nation  and  his  peculiar  people.  But  theij  are 
not  rejected,  as  Jews,  neither  are  they  received  to  baptism  as  Jeios. 
They  are  rejected  because  they  reject  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the 
Messiah,  and  they  are  received  because  they  have  received  Jesus 
as  the  Messiah.  It  is  essential  to  our  induction  into  the  spirit 
and  genius  of  primitive  and  pure  Christianity  that  we  keep  this 
cardinal  and  all-important  fact  before  us — viz.  that  the  Jews 
were  neither  received  nor  rejected  by  John  as  Jews  ;  nor  were 
they  received  or  rejected  upon  the  indefinite  belief  or  disbelief 
of  a  Messiah,  a  Saviour  to  come ;  but  they  were  received  or  re- 
jected upon  the  distinct  and  definite  belief  or  disbelief — that 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  that  definite  and  special  Messiah,  of  whom 
Moses,  in  the  law,  and  all  the  Prophets  did  speak. 

In  preparing  a  people  for  the  Lord,  John  did  not  propose  to 
build  a  church  within  a  church — to  erect  an  imperium  in  impe- 
rio;  but  simply  by  faith,  repentance,  and  baptism,  to  have  a 
people  ready  for  the  manifestation  of  the  Messiah,  to  become 
the  nucleus  of  a  new  institution. 

Faith,  then,  and  not  flesh — personal  repentance,  and  not  fa- 
mily lineage,  are  essential  prerequisites  to  admission  into  John's 
confidence  and  baptism,  as  the  herald  of  the  true  Messiah. 
Thus,  he  levelled  the  mountains  and  exalted  the  valleys ;  thus, 
he  made  the  crooked  ways  straight  and  the  rough  places  smooth, 
that  all  flesh  might  now  meet  on  one  new,  solid,  sublime,  and 
enduring  foundation. 

Neither  John  nor  his  preaching,  neither  his  repentance  nor 
his  baptism,  was  intended  to  reform  or  new-modify,  to  improve 
or  perfect  the  Jewish  constitution  and  community.  Since  the 
Messiah  was  born,  and  had  come  out  of  the  nation,  its  solemn 
rites  were  but  an  empty  shell.  The  kernel  was  now  extracted. 
Hence  spirit  and  not  flesh,  faith  and  not  blood,  baptism  and  not 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  211 

circumcision,  became  the  burden  of  the  Harbinger,  the  Messiah 
himself,  and  his  seventy  Evangelists. 

Very  early  in  the  evangelical  history,  we  are  told  that  he  came 
to  his  own  country — ancient  Canaan,  the  covenanted  inheritance 
of  Abraham  and  his  seed ;  but  his  own  people — his  kinsmen  in 
Abraham,  received  him  not  in  the  character  and  mission  which 
he  had  assumed.  But  he  was  well  and  cordially  received  by  a 
few.  Hence  it  is  declared,  that  "to  as  many  as  received  him,  to 
them  he  gave  the  privilege  or  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God — 
even  to  them  that  believe  in  his  name;  who  were  born,"  not  as 
the  Jewish  nation,  "  of  blood,  of  flesh,  and  of  the  will  of  man  ; 
but  of  God."  Here  is  the  clear  and  distinct  avowal  of  the  spi- 
rituality of  the  new  kingdom.  God's  ancient  kingdom  was  of  this 
wcyrld,  so  long  as  the  flesh  of  his  Son  was  in  it.  But  now  he 
has  come  out  of  it,  and  faith  unites  us  to  him  as  the  Founder 
of  a  new  kingdom.  This  explains  his  speech  to  Nicodemus,  a 
learned  ruler  of  the  Jews'  church,  on  the  necessity  of  being 
spiritually  born  before  he  could  possibly  be  admitted  into  the 
new  kingdom  of  God. 

There  is  great  potency  in  an  appropriate  name.  Hence  the 
Spirit  of  wisdom  and  of  eloquence  selected  for  the  first  annun- 
ciation of  this  new  institution  the  beautiful  and  attractive  name, 
**  The  Reign  of  Heaven."  This  reign  of  Heaven  in  the  heart, 
in  a  society,  or  organized  community,  is  called  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven,  and  the  Kingdom  of  God.  But,  as  the  Jews  were,  in 
their  fleshly  and  worldly  character,  as  a  nation  and  people, 
placed  under  the  special  government  of  God,  they  were,  in  that 
sense,  called  ^^the  Kingdom  of  God."  It  was,  therefore,  kindly 
intimated  by  the  first  of  the  Evangelists,  and  by  the  Harbinger 
on  his  first  annunciation  of  a  new  institution,  that,  in  contrast 
with  the  kingdom  of  God  amongst  the  Jews,  which  was  of  this 
world,  this  should  be  first  known  as  ^^the  Kingdom  of  Heaven," 
because  of  its  inducting  its  citizens  into  a  state  of  spiritual 
blessedness,  as  far  above  all  antecedent  dispensations  as  the 
heavens  are  higher  than  the  earth. 

It  is  cheerfully  and  thankfully  admitted  that  amongst  myriads 
of  men  in  the  flesh,  there  always  was  a  remnant  of  persons  in 
the  Jews'  institution  of  distinguished  piety  and  of  great  moral 
and  spiritual  excellence  and  eminence.  But  they  were  not  so 
by  the  spirit  and  force  of  that  institution,  but  by  the  spiritual 
provisions  of  the  first  covenant  that  God  made  with  Abraham ; 


212  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

which,  in  its  prospective  character,  intimated  the  Christian  in- 
stitution "with  all  its  provisions  of  righteousness  and  mercy,  as 
now  fully  developed.  But  now,  all  true  citizens  of  the  Chris- 
tian kingdom,  by  virtue  of  its  own  provisions,  and  without  any 
foreign  aid  from  an  antecedent  or  a  subsequent  institution,  are 
made  partakers  of  all  spiritual  light,  liberty,  and  privilege 
essential  to  the  full  development  of  a  perfect  character,  and  to 
the  full  enjoyment  of  all  the  blessings  of  wisdom,  righteousness, 
holiness,  and  redemption. 

The  institution  announced  by  John  is  properly  called  a  New 
Institution.  Hence  its  foundation  is  new,  as  well  as  its  privi- 
leges, rights,  immunities.  John,  in  preparing  the  way  for  its 
annunciation,  therefore,  very  appropriately  calls  for  personal 
reformation  before  baptism.  He  refuses  all  who  cannot,  or  who 
will  not,  confess  their  sins  and  profess  repentance  prior  to  bap- 
tism. All  his  converts  were  baptized  by  him  confessing  or  ac- 
knowledging their  sins.  Hence,  they  were  persons  who  had 
sinned,  and  who  did  believe,  and  could  make  confession  of  sin 
and  declaration  of  repentance.  No  one  can  say  that  John 
preached  two  baptisms,  one  having  no  confession  of  sin,  no 
repentance  connected  with  it ;  and  one  that  refused  both  Phari- 
see and  Sadducee,  soliciting  baptism  because  of  their  relations 
to  Abraham,  without  faith  in  the  Messiah  and  reformation  of 
life. 

Indeed,  John  positively  declares  that  he  preached  "the  bap- 
tism of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins."  It  is  called  ''the 
baptism  of  repentance.''  Now,  it  is  impossible  that  infants  or 
impenitent  persons  could  have  been  the  subjects  of  John's  bap- 
tism. Two  things  were  essential  to  entitle  a  person  to  John's 
baptism :  the  first  is,  that  he  had  been  a  sinner,  and  was  now  a 
penitent  sinner.  Will  either  of  these  apply  to  tender  infants  ? 
Who  presumes  to  say  that  infants  are  sinners,  or  that  they  are 
penitent  sinners,  and  that  they  can  speak  out  and  confess  that 
they  once  were  impenitent,  but  are  now  penitent  sinners  ?  In 
the  absence  of  actual  transgression,  in  the  absence  of  repent- 
ance for  actual  transgression,  and  in  the  absence  of  a  power  to 
speak  out  and  confess  their  sins,  no  one  was  a  proper  subject  of 
John's  baptism.  May  we  not,  then,  fearlessly  affirm  that,  for 
these  irrefragable  reasons,  John  baptized  no  infants — none,  in- 
deed, but  penitent  and  reforming  persons  of  mature  age  and 
reason.     One  important  fact,  of  much  value  in  this  investiga- 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  213 

tion,  is  now  established,  viz.  that  the  introductory  baptism, 
ordained  by  God,  called  ftfr  knowledge,  conviction  of  sin,  re- 
pentance, and  confession  on  the  part  of  the  subjects  of  it.  That 
this  conclusion  may  appear  well-founded,  we  shall  submit  all 
the  passages  that  speak  of  the  subjects  of  John's  baptism,  and 
the  peculiarities  of  his  mission.     They  are  the  following : — 

Mark  i.  1 :  "  The  beginning  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God." 

John  i.  6,  7 :  "  There  was  a  man  sent  from  God,  whose  name 
fvas  John :  the  same  came  to  bear  witness  of  the  Light,  that  all 
men  through  him  might  believe."  Matt.  iii.  3 :  "  For  this  is 
he  that  was  spoken  of  by  the  Prophet  Esaias,  saying,  The  voice 
of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord, 
make  his  paths  straight." 

Jiuke  i.  16,  17  :  "And  many  of  the  children  of  Israel  shall  he 
turn  to  the  Lord  their  God :  and  he  shall  go  before  him  in  the 
spirit  and  power  of  Elias,  to  turn  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to 
the  children,  and  the  disobedient  to  the  wisdom  of  the  just ;  to 
make  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord."  iii.  1,2:  "  Now, 
the  word  of  God  came  unto  John,  the  son  of  Zacharias,  in  the 
wilderness." 

Mark  iii.  1 :  "In  those  days  came  John  the  Baptist,  preaching 
in  the  wilderness  of  Judea."  Luke  iii.  2:  "  And  he  came  into 
all  the  country  about  Jordan,  preaching  the  baptism  of  repent- 
ance for  the  remission  of  sins."  Matt.  iii.  2:  "And  saying. 
Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand." 

Acts  xiii.  24:  "John  preached  the  baptism  of  repentance  to 
all  the  people  of  Israel."  xix.  4:  "Saying  unto  the  people, 
that  they  should  believe  on  him  which  should  come  after  him — 
that  is,  on  Christ  Jesus." 

John  i.  19  to  31 :  "And  this  is  the  record  of  John,  when  the 
Jews  sent  Priests  and  Levites  to  ask  him,  AVho  art  thou  ?  He 
confessed,  I  am  not  the  Christ.  I  am  the  voice  of  one  crying  in 
the  wilderness.  Make  straight  the  way  of  the  Lord.  And  they 
asked  him,  Why  baptizest  thou,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ  ? 
John  answered,  I  baptize  in  water ;  but  there  standeth  one 
among  you,  who,  coming  after  me,  is  preferred  before  me.  That 
HE  should  be  manifest  to  Israel,  therefore  am  I  come  baptizing 
in  water.     33.  [For  God]  sent  me  to  baptize  in  water." 

Matt.  iii.  5  :  "  Then  went  out  to  him  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea, 
and  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan ;  6.  And  were  baptized 
of  him  in  the  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins." 

Mark  i.  4:  "John  did  baptize  in  the  wilderness,  and  preach 
the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  5.  And 
there  went  out  unto  him  all  the  land  of  Judea  and  they  of  Jeru- 


214  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

salem,  and  were  all  baptized  of  him  in  the  river  of  Jordan,  con- 
fessing their  sins." 

Luke  iii.  12  :  "  Then  came  also  publicans  to  be  baptized,  and 
said  unto  him,  Master,  what  shall  we  do  ?  12.  And  he  said  unto 
them,  Exact  no  more  than  that  which  is  appointed  you." 

Matt.  iii.  7 :  "  But  when  he  saw  many  ot  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees  come  to  his  baptism,  he  said  unto  them,  0  generation 
of  vipers,  who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come? 
8.  Bring  forth,  therefore,  fruits  meet  for  repentance  ;  9.  And 
think  not  to  say  within  yourselves,  We  have  Abraham  for  our 
father :  for  I  say  unto  you,  that  God  is  able  of  these  stones  to 
raise  up  children  unto  Abraham.  11.  I,  indeed,  baptize  you 
with  water  unto  repentance ;  but  he  that  cometh  after-  me  ia 
mightier  than  I,  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  bear  ;  he  shall 
baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire  ;  12.  Whose  fan 
is  in  his  hand,  and  he  wiU  thoroughly  purge  his  floor,  and  gather 
his  wheat  into  the  garner ;  but  he  will  burn  up  the  chaff  wjth 
unquenchable  fire." 

Matt.  iii.  13  :  "  Then  cometh  Jesus  from  Galilee  to  Jordan 
unto  John  to  be  baptized  of  him.  14.  But  John  forbade  him, 
saying,  I  have  need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to 
me  ?  15.  And  Jesus  answering,  said  unto  him.  Suffer  itio  be  so 
now ;  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all  righteousness.  Then 
he  suffered  him."  Mark  i.  9:  [Thus]  "  Jesus  came  from  Nazareth 
of  Galilee,  and  he  was  baptized  of  John  in  the  Jordan." 

Matt.  iii.  16 :  "  And  Jesus,  when  he  was  baptized,  went  up 
straightway  out  of  the  water."  Mark  i.  10 :  "And — coming  up  out 
of  the  water,"  Luke  iii.  21,  "  and  praying,  the  heaven  was  opened, 
22,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  descended  in  a  bodily  shape  like  a  dove 
upon  him,  and  a  voice  came  from  heaven,  which  said.  Thou  art 
my  beloved  Son ;  in  thee  I  am  well  pleased.  23.  And  Jesus 
himself  began  to  be  about  thirty  years  of  age." 

John  i.  32 :  "  And  John  bare  record,  saying,  I  saw  the  Spirit 
descending  from  heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon  him.  29, 
36.  And  looking  upon  Jesus  as  he  walked,  he  saith,  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God,  which  takoth  away  the  sin  of  the  world  !  34.  And 
I  saw,  and  bare  record  that  this  is  the  Son  of  God.  28.  These 
things  were  done  in  Bethabara,  where  John  was  baptizing." 

John  iii.  22 :  "  After  these  things  came  Jesus  and  his  disciples 
into  the  land  of  Judea;  and  there  he  tarried  with  them  and  bap- 
tized. 26.  And  they  came  unto  John,  and  said  unto  him.  Be- 
hold, he  that  was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou  barest 
witness,  behold,  the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  to  him. 
27.  John  answered  and  said,  A  man  can  receive  nothing  except 
it  be  given  him  from  heaven.  30.  He  must  increase,  but  I  must 
decrease." 

Chap.  iv.  1 :  "  Wlien,  therefore,  the  Lord  knew  how  the  Phari- 
sees had  heard  that  Jesus  made  and  baptized  more  disciples  than 


SUBJECTS   OF  BAPTISM.  215 

John,  2.  (Though  Jesus  himself  baptized  not,  but  his  disciples,) 
3.  He  left  Judea,  and  departed  again  into  Galilee,  x.  40.  And 
[he]  went  away  again  beyond  the  Jordan,  into  the  place  where 
John  at  first  baptized ;  42.  And  many  believed  on  him  there/' 

Luke  vii.  24:  "And  when  the  messengers  of  John  were  de- 
parted, he  began  to  speak  unto  the  people  concerning  John. 
What  went  ye  out  into  the  wilderness  for  to  see  ?  26.  A 
Prophet  ?  Yea,  I  say  unto  you,  and  more  than  a  Prophet." 
Matt.  xi.  10 :  "  For  this  is  he  of  whom  it  is  written.  Behold,  I  send 
my  messenger  before  thy  face,  which  shall  prepare  thy  way  be- 
fore thee.  11.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Among  them  that  are 
born  of  women,  there  hath  not  arisen  a  greater  than  John  the 
Baptist."  John  v.  35  :  "  He  was  a  burning  and  a  shining  light." 

Mark  xi.  29.  *'And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  I 
will  also  ask  you  one  question.  30.  The  baptism  of  John,  was 
it  from  heaven,  or  of  men?  Answer  me.  31.  And  they  reasoned 
with  themselves,  saying,  If  we  shall  say,  From  heaven ;  he  will 
say,  AYhy  then  did  ye  not  believe  him?  32.  But  if  we  shall 
say.  Of  men ;  (all  the  people  will  stone  us  :  Luke  xx.  6,)  they 
feared  the  people  ;  for  all  men  counted  John  that  he  was  a 
Prophet  indeed.  33.  And  they  answered  and  said  unto  Jesus, 
We  cannot  tell." 

Luke  vii.  29  :  "  And  all  the  people  that  heard  him,  and  the 
publicans,  justified  God,  being  baptized  with  the  baptism  of 
John.  30.  But  the  Pharisees  and  lawyers  rejected^  the  counsel 
of  God  against  themselves,  being  not  baptized  by  him." 

From  a  careful  examination  of  the  whole  testimony  of  the 
four  Evangelists  concerning  John^s  baptism,  there  appears  as 
much  reason  to  conclude  that  the  Messiah  Was  an  infant  when 
John  immersed  him  in  the  Jordan,  as  that  he  ever  baptized  an 
infant  or  any  one  incapable  of  confessing  his  sins  and  profess- 
ing reformation. 

His  baptism  is  called  baptism  of  repentance.  It  is  so  called  by 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Paul ;  of  course,  then,  none  but  penitents 
could  be  the  subjects  of  a  "  baptism  of  repentance  for  remission 
of  sins."  Infants  have  not  siiis  to  repent  of;  and,  therefore, 
can  neither  morally,  nor  physically,  nor  by  proxy  confess  them. 
Hundreds  of  candid  Pedobaptists  avow  the  conviction  that  John's 
baptism,  at  least,  was  addressed  only  to  persons  of  mature  age 
and  reason.  With  the  Episcopal  commentators,  T.  Scott  and 
Burkitt,  "  almost  all  learned  men  say  John's  baptism  was  the 
baptism  of  repentance,  of  which  infants  were  incapable."  Bur- 
kitt's  Notes  on  Matt.  xix.  13-15.  "  It  does  not  appear  that 
any  but  adults  were  baptized  by  John.    Adults  professing  re- 


216  SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

pentance  and  a  disposition  to  become  the  Messiah's  subjects, 
were  the  only  persons  whom  John  admitted  to  baptism."  T. 
Scott's  Com.,  Matt.  iii.  56. 

It  is  as  inexpedient  as  unnecessary  to  multiply  such  conces- 
sions and  acknowledgments  as  these.  Scarcely  anyone  is  so 
presumptuous  as  to  contend  that  John  baptized  any  one,  except 
the  Messiah,  who  did  not  confess  his  sins  ;  and  but  very  few 
have  had  courage  to  affirm  that  he  ever  sprinkled  or  poured 
water  upon  any  one,  infant  or  adult. 

But  there  are  those  that  assume  that  there  was  a  Jewish 
proselyte  baptism  in  use  long  before  the  days  of  the  Baptist, 
and  that  John  derived  his  baptism  from  it.  This,  it  must  be 
confessed,  is  a  very  weak  bulwark  in  defence  of  infant  baptism. 
Infant  proselytes  !  I  What  an  easy  triumph !  I  John  could  not 
have  said  to  such,  "  Generation  of  vipers,  who  has  warned  you 
to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come?  Bring  forth  fruits  worthy 
of  repentance,  and  think  not  to  say,  We  have  Abraham  for 
our  father." 

A  few  great  names  have,  indeed,  been  arrayed  before  us, 
affirming  that  such  a  rite  was  in  use  from  very  ancient  times 
amongst  the  Jews.  But  as  many  great,  if  not  greater  names, 
can  be  arrayed  on  the  negative  side.  Do  they  mention  a  Light- 
foot,  a  Beza,  a  Maimonides  ?  We  will  offset  these  with  a  Werns- 
dorfius,  a  Deylingius,  an  Eliezer,  and  a  KnatchbuU.  Do  they  ap- 
peal to  the  Talmud,  "that  labyrinth  of  errors  and  foundation  of 
Jewish  fables  ?"  We  call  for  Josephus,  who  is  as  silent  as  the 
grave  on  this  assumption.  Do  they  appeal  to  Rabbis?  We 
summon  Philo  and  the  Apocrapha.  Neither  of  these  so  much 
as  allude  to  it.  Do  they  tell  us  of  Dr.  Owen  ?  We  tell  them  of 
Dr.  Benson.  Do  they  prove  that  ever  the  Jews  baptized  a  prose- 
lyte ?  Let  them  name  him.  Then  we  will  show  that  he  lived 
after  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist,  from  whom  doubtless  cer- 
tain Jews  borrowed  proselyte  baptism. 

But  we  appeal  to  a  stronger  and  a  clearer  light.  We  inquire 
at  the  Oracle  of  God.  And  what  saith  it  ?  That  John's  bap- 
tism was  a  new  institution.  The  words  of  those  who  ought  to 
know  it  import  this.  The  Priests  and  the  Levites  ask  John, 
*'  If  thou  art  neither  the  Christ,  nor  Elias,  nor  the  Prophet,  why 
baptizest  thou?"  For  this  reason,  says  John,  "I  am  come  bap- 
tizing in  water,  because"  I  knew  that "  he  should  be  made  mani- 
fest to  Israel."     Does  not  this  indicate  a  new  commission  and  a 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  217 

new  Institution  ?  To  the  same  effect,  says  Paul,  in  his  speech  at 
Antioch,  in  Pisidia — "  When  John  had  first  preached  before 
his  coming  the  baptism  of  repentance  to  all  the  people  of 
Israel." 

But  there  are  two  passages  of  Scripture  still  more  expressly 
contradictory  of  this  assumption.  The  one  is  taken  from  the 
Messiah  himself.  I  ask  you,  says  he,  "Whence  came  the  bap- 
tism of  John — from  heaven  or  from  men  V  They  dare  not 
say  from  men,  for  the  people  know  better  and  would  have  stoned 
them. 

The  other  passage  is  Heb.  ix.  10.  In  this  all  the  divinely 
appointed  rites,  washing  and  bathing,  practised  by  the  Jews, 
are  said'to  have  been  ordained  only  till  the  time  of  reformation^ 
or  to  the  Christian  era.  These  clearly  indicate  that  John's  bap- 
tism was  from  God,  and  not  from  tradition  or  from  the  Jews. 
Indeed,  all  this  is  logically  and  grammatically  implied  in  call- 
ing him  the  Baptist.  A  baptist  he  might  have  been,  but  the 
Baptist  he  could  not  be  but  by  contrast  or  by  eminence. 

There  is,  however,  one  fact  in  the  history  of  Jews'  proselyte 
"baptism  as  ancient  as  the  existence  of  the  iisage,  whether  that 
be  before  or  since  the  Baptist's  time,  fatal  to  the  use  that  the 
advocates  of  infant  baptism  make  of  it.     It  is  this:  "It  was 

NEVER     REPEATED   ON    THE     POSTERITY   OF    THOSE    WHO     HAD    BEEN" 

THUS  BAPTIZED."*  Dr.  Johu  Walker,  of  Dublin,  and  the  Soci- 
nians,  regarding  Christian  baptism  as  a  proselyting  institution, 
refuse  baptism  to  those  whose  parents  have  been  baptized.  In- 
deed, all  those  who  regard  baptism  as  a  proselyting  usage,  after 
the  Jewish  style,  ought  never  to  baptize  their  descendants, 
whether  infants  or  adults. 

We  conclude,  then,  from  all  the  premises  extant,  whether  in 
the  New  Testament  or  out  of  it,  that  the  baptizing  of  infants  is 
without  the  slightest  countenance,  so  far  down  as  the  personal 
ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  or  of  the  Messiah  in  person,  is 
concerned.  If,  then,  it  be  a  divine  institution,  it  must  be  a 
Christian  institution  ;  and  if  a  Christian  institution,  it  must  have 
been  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ.  Of  course,  then,  the  proof 
necessarily  lies  upon  him  that  affirms  that  Jesus  Christ  ordained 
it.  We  ask  for  such  evidence.  Those  who  have  it  must,  then, 
produce  it.     It  is  not  incumbent  on  us  to  prove  that  the  Mes- 

*  gee  the  great  Selden,  De  Jure,  et  Gen.  lib.  ii.  cap.  ii.  pp.  139, 142. 
19 


218  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

eiah  did  not  institute  or  ordain  infant  baptism.  It  is  incumbent 
on  them  that  inculcate  and  practise  it  to  show  the  Christian  au- 
thority under  which  they  act.  A  positive  institution  requires 
positive  precept — a  positive  and  express  authority.  No  positive 
institution  has  ever  been  established  upon  mere  inference.  To 
attempt  to  found  a  positive  Christian  ordinance  upon  an  infer- 
ence, or  upon  a  series  of  inferences,  is,  in  spirit  and  in  effect,  to 
stultify  and  make  void  its  pretensions.  When  was  there  in  the 
history  of  the  Bible  a  positive  institution  or  a  divine  ordinance 
erected,  enforced,  and  practised,  upon  a  mere  inference  ?  We 
ask  for  a  parallel  case.  It  never  has  been  given.  It  never  can 
be  given.  AYe  have  called  upon  its  advocates  times  without 
number  for  such  a  precept — for  such  a  positive  injunction ;  but 
hitherto  we  have  asked  in  vain. 

We  can,  occasionally,  circumstantially  prove  a  negative.  We 
sometimes  prove  an  alibi.  We  show  that  the  accused  was  else- 
where at  the  time  and  place  in  which  the  imputed  deed  was  com- 
mitted. The  argument  then  is.  The  accused  did  not  do  it,  be- 
cause he  could  not  do  it;  for  he  was  not  there. 

The  assumption  on  hand  may,  indeed,  in  this  way  be  nega- 
tived, and  the  negative  maintained.  We  show  that  there  is 
no  baptism  of  divine  authority,  or  of  divine  record,  that  did 
not  require  a  moral  qualification  on  the  part  of  the  subject 
of  it.  John,  for  example,  demanded  faitli,  repentance,  and  cow- 
fession  on  the  part  of  those  who  demanded  his  baptism.  In- 
deed he  went  still  farther.  He  repudiated  the  plea  of  ances- 
torial  worth,  of  ancestorial  faith,  in  the  strongest  imaginable 
terms.  He  supposes  a  case  in  which  a  son  of  Abraham,  "  the 
Father  of  the  Faithful,^'  presents  himself  demanding  baptism  on 
account  of  fleshly  relationship.  And  what  does  he  say  to  him  ? 
"  Think  not  to  say  in  your  heart  that  you  are  a  son  of  Abra- 
ham''— that  this  renowned  Patriarch  is  your  father.  Nay, 
verily.  "  Bring  forth  fruits  worthy"  of  the  profession  of  repent- 
ance. Confess  your  sins  and  forsake  them.  Here,  then,  may 
be  found  a  full  demonstration  of  the  ground  we  have  assumed. 
The  required  qualification  of  the  subject  maybe  such  as  to  nega- 
tive the  approach  of  any  one,  of  every  one  who  is  physically  or 
otherwise  disqualified.  Now  what  alibi  in  law  is  more  evident 
than  if  faith,  repentance,  and  confession  be  required  in  any  case 
as  a  prerequisite  to  the  reception  of  any  institution,  the  want  of 
those  qualifications  wholly  disqualifies  such  a  candidate  for  that 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  219 

institution,  and  negatives  his  advances  to  it.  So  long,  then,  as 
it  is  written,  "If  thou  believest  with  all  thy  heart  thou  mayest,'* 
it  is  also  implied  that  if  thou  dost  not  believe  with  all  thy  heart 
thou  mayest  not  be  baptized. 


CHAPTER  II. 


SUBJECTS   OF   CHRISTIAN   BAPTISM. — INDUCTION   OF   NEW 
TESTAMENT    CASES, 

John's  baptism  was  not  Christ's  baptism.  It  was  a  prepara- 
tory institution.  John  was  not  sent  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
but  by  his  Father.  "Behold,"  said  God  the  Father,  "I  send 
ray  messenger  to  prepare  the  way  before  thee.""^  John  fulfilled 
his  mission.  He  prepared  a  people  for  the  Lord.  Those  whom 
he  prepared  had  been,  as  we  have  seen,  instructed  before  they 
were  baptized.  It  is,  then,  just  as  evident  that  John's  disciples 
were  not  infants^  as  that  they  were  not  sprinkled. 

But  Christian  baptism  is  our  theme.  It  was  instituted  by 
Jesus  Christ ;  and  neither  by  Moses,  the  lawgiver,  nor  by  John, 
the  reformer.  When,  then,  did  lie  institute  it  ?  Not  at  the  be- 
ginning, nor  at  the  end  of  his  life.  During  his  public  ministry, 
and  until  he  was  crucified  and  buried,  John's  baptism  had  nei- 
ther rival  nor  substitute.  Jesus,  indeed,  says  John,  "  baptized 
not,  but  his  disciples  baptized."  The  preparatory  school  con- 
tinued during  the  whole  personal  ministry  of  the  harbinger  and 
the  Messiah.  But,  when  John  was  beheaded,  and  Jesus  cruci- 
fied, there  was  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord ! !  These  were 
they  that  rallied  around  the  Messiah  during  the  last  scenes  of 
his  life  and  after  his  resurrection.  These  were  they  to  whom 
he  showed  himself  alive  after  his  passion,  and  to  whom  he  com- 
municated freely,  during  the  period  of  forty  days,  the  things  con- 
cerning the  kingdom  of  God. 

How  many  hundreds  composed  the  preparatory  school  of  the 
risen  Lord,  we  are  not  informed.  We  learn  from  Paul,  that,  in 
one  of  their  meetings,  more  than  five  hundred  disciples  were 
present. 

.    *  Matt.  ix.  10. 


220  SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

But,  as  God  did  not  deliver  his  law  to  the  people  at  the  foot 
of  the  mount,  but  to  Moses  in  the  mount,  so  the  Messiah  did  not 
deliver  his  new  institution  and  law  to  these  hundreds,  but  to 
the  select  band  of  the  Apostles,  to  whom  he  had  already  im- 
parted his  gracious  purposes.  To  them  he  gave  the  commission, 
and  the  laiv  of  baptism,  upon  a  mountain  in  Galilee.  It  was 
given  immediately  before  his  visible  and  personal  ascension  into 
heaven.  It  was  his  last  act,  the  consummation  of  his  work  as 
a  Lawgiver  and  King.  It  is  most  fully  reported  by  Matthew, 
and  is  in  the  following  words: — '^  All  power  is  given  to  me  in 
heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  ivhatsoever  I  have 
commanded  youJ' 

This  is  the  laio  of  Christian  baptism,  the  institution  and  ori- 
gin of  it ;  and,  certainly,  it  is  a  clear  and  express  precept. 
Though  quite  intelligible  in  the  common  version  of  it,  as  now 
quoted  ;  it  is,  nevertheless,  imperfectly  and,  indeed,  in  a  compa- 
rative point  of  view,  rather  obscurely  translated.  It  should,  in 
strict  accordance  with  the  original  Greek,  be  translated — "All 
authority  in  heaven  and  in  earth  is  given  to  me :  go  you,  there- 
fore, and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  the  things  that  I  have  commanded 
you ;  and,  behold !  I  am  always  with  you  to  the  conclusion  of 
this  state." 

According  to  the  common  version  of  this  law  of  baptism, 
Jesus  taught  the  Apostles  first  to  teach  all  nations,  "then  to  bap- 
tize them  ;  and  again  to  teach  them  all  his  observances.  The  com- 
mon reader  would  regard  this  as  simply  requiring  that  the 
nations  be  taught  before  and  after  baptism !  But,  in  the  ori- 
ginal language,  we  have  not  this  difficulty  to  contend  with.  We 
have  two  words  of  very  different  meaning,  occurring  in  the 
same  verse,  translated  by  one  and  the  same  word,  teach.  These 
are  matheteuoo  and  didascoo.  They  are  visibly  and  audibly  dif- 
ferent words.  They  are  not  composed  of  the  same  characters, 
nor  of  the  same  sounds.  They  are  just  as  different  in  sense. 
They  both,  indeed,  mean  to  impart  instruction ;  but  it  is  a  dif- 
ferent kind  of  instruction.  The  first  indicates  that  instruction 
necessary  to  make  a  disciple :  the  second  imparts  that  species 
of  instruction  afterwards  given  to  one  who  has  become  a  disci- 


SUBJECTS   OF  BAPTISM.  221 

pie  wltli  regard  to  his  duties.  The  first  represents  the  person, 
character,  and  claims  of  the  teacher,  and  the  necessity  of  becom- 
ing his  pupil ;  the  second  represents  the  duties  and  obligations 
of  the  pupil  to  his  teacher.  The  first  intimates  the  simple 
preaching  of  the  gospel  as  Mark  the  evangelist  interprets  it, 
chap.  xiv.  16,  His  version  of  the  whole  commission  is — "Go 
ye  into  all  the  world,  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature ;  he 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned." 

Now,  that  three  things,  very  difierent  from  each  other  in  some 
essential  attribute,  are  prescribed  by  the  Lord  Messiah  in  this 
commission,  or  law  of  apostolic  and  ministerial  duty  in  his  ser- 
vice, cannot  admit  of  a  rational  doubt.  What  these  three  dis- 
tinct things  were,  need  scarcely  be  enumerated.  Every  reader 
must  observe  that  they  were  first  to  preach  the  gospel,  or  make 
disciples — produce  faith.  Then  they  were  to  baptize  them,  so 
instructed,  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  In  the  third  place,  they  were  didactically  to 
propound  to  them,  or  teach  them  to  observe  and  practise  the 
Christian  ordinances  and  duties. 

But,  as  every  one  will  not  admit,  with  entire  freedom  from 
prejudice,  our  interpretation  of  the  law  of  baptism,  I  have  con- 
cluded to  collate  the  views  and  interpretations  of  this  passage, 
entertained  and  taught  by  distinguished  scholars  and  critics  on 
the  Pedobaptist  side  of  this  question.  They  will  be  heard  by 
many  of  my  readers  with  more  authority  and  candour  than  I 
could  claim  for  myself.  Here,  then,  are  a  few  samples  of  Pedo- 
baptist interpretations  of  the  law  of  Christian  baptism.  They 
are,  for  the  most  part,  copied  from  *'  Booth's  Pedobaptism  Exa- 
mined," a  work  of  very  great  labour  and  of  distinguished 
merit : — 

Grotius :  *'  Seeing  there  are  two  kinds  of  teaching,  one  by  way 
of  introduction  to  the  first  principles,  the  other  by  way  of  more 
perfect  instruction:  the  former  seems  to  be  intended  by  the 
word  matheteum,  for  that  is,  as  it  were,  to  initiate  into  discipline, 
and  is  to  go  before  baptism ;  the  latter  is  intended  by  the  word 
didaskein,  which  is  here  placed  after  baptism."     In  loc. 

Calvin:  "Because  Christ  requires  teaching  before  baptizing, 
and  will  have  believers  only  admitted  to  baptism,  baptism  does 
not  seem  to  be  rightly  administered,  except  faith  precede.  Under 
this  pretence,  the  Anabaptists  have  loudly  clamoured  against 
Pedobaptism."     In  Harm.  Evang.  Comment,  ad  loc. 


222  SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

Dr.  Barrow:  "What  the  action  itself  enjoined  is,  what  the 
manner  and  form  thereof,  is  apparent  by  the  words  of  our  Lord^a 
institution :  Going  forth,  saith  he,  teach,  or  disciple,  all  nationSj 
haptizing  them.  The  action  is  baptizing  or  immersing  in  water ; 
the  object  thereof,  those  persons,  of  any  nation,  whom  his  mi- 
nisters can,  by  their  instruction  and  persuasion,  render  disci- 
ples ;  that  is,  such  as  do  sincerely  believe  the  truth  of  his  doc- 
trine, and  seriously  resolve  to  obey  his  commandments/^  "Works, 
Tol.  i.  p.  518,  edit.  1722. 

Saurin:  "In  the  primitive  church,  instruction  preceded  bap- 
tism, agreeably  to  the  order  of  Jesus  Christ;  'Go,  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them/  ....  Thus,  likewise,  we  understand 
St.  Peter,  when  he  says,  that  the  baptism  which  saves  us,  is 
*  not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh ;  but  the  answer  of 
a  good  conscience.'  The  amioer  of  a  good  conscience,  is  that 
account  which  the  catechumen  gives  of  his  faith  and  knowledge. 
Whence  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  ancients  usually  called  a  bap- 
tized person,  one  that  was  illuminated."  Serm.  torn.  i.  pp.  301, 
302.     Le  Haye,  edit.  3d. 

Vossius:  "Respecting  adults,  it  is  required  that  they  be 
taught  the  Christian  religion  and  profess  it,  before  they  be  bap- 
tized ;  for  this  the  very  institution  of  baptism  teaches,  (Matt, 
xxviii.  19  ;  Mark  xvi.  15,  16.)  We  are  taught  the  same  thing 
by  the  practice  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  of  the  Apostles,  (Matt. 
iii.  1,  2;  Luke  iii.  3;  Acts  ii.  38,  41.)"  Disput.  de  Bap.  disput. 
xii.  I  3. 

Dr.  Doddridge :  "  I  render  the  word  maiheeteusate,  prosehjte, 
that  it  may  be  duly  distinguished  from  didaskonfes,  teaching,  (in 
the  next  verse,)  with  which  our  version  confounds  it.  The  for- 
mer seems  to  import  instruction  in  the  essentials  of  religion, 
which  it  was  necessary  adult  persons  should  know  and  suljmit 
to,  before  they  could  regularly  be  admitted  to  baptism ;  the  lat- 
ter may  relate  to  those  more  particular  admonitions  in  regard 
to  Christian  faith  and  practice,  which  were  to  be  built  on  that 
foundation."     Note  on  the  place. 

Lim])orch  :  "They  could  not  make  disciples,  unless  by  teach- 
ing. By  that  instruction,  disciples  were  brought  to  the  ftiith 
before  they  were  baptized,  (Mark  xiv.  15,  IQ'.)"  Instit.  1.  v. 
c.  Ixvii.  ^  7. 

Dr.  AVhitby:  "Maihetenin  here,  is  *to  preach  the  gospel  to  all 
nations,'  and  to  engage  them  to  believe  it,  in  order  to  their  pro- 
fession of  that  faith  by  baptism  :  as  seems  apparent,  (1)  From 
the  parallel  commission,  Mark  xvi.  15,  'Go,  preach  the  gospel 
to  every  creature.  He  that  believeth,  and  is  baptized,  shall  be 
saved.'  (2)  From  the  Scripture  notion  of  a  disciple,  that  being 
still  the  same  as  a  believer.  ...  If  here  it  should  be  said  that 
I  yield  too  much  to  the  Anti-pedobaptists,  by  saying,  that  to  be 
made  disciples  here  is  to  be  taught  to  believe  in  Christ ;  I  desire 


SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISM.  22^ 

any  one  to  tell  me  how  the  Apostles  could  mathdeuin,  make  a 
disciple  of  a  heathen  or  an  unbelieving  Jew,  without  being  ma- 
thetai,  or  teacher's  of  them  ;  whether  they  were  not  sent  to  preach 
to  those  that  could  hear,  and  to  teach  them  to  whom  they 
preached,  that  'Jesus  was  the  Christ/  and  only  to  baptize  them 
when  they  did  believe  this/^     Annotat.  on  the  place. 

Venema :  "  *Go,'  says  our  Lord  to  the  Apostles,  *  teach  all  na- 
tions, baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you/  This  is  an  excellent  pas- 
sage, and  explains  the  whole  nature  of  baptism.  Before  persons 
were  baptized,  it  was  necessary  for  them  to  believe  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Apostles,  which  faith  they  were  to  profess  in  baptism. 
For  the  word  matheteuin,  in  the  style  of  the  New  Testament, 
does  not  signify  barely  to  admit  into  a  school  and  instruction ; 
but  to  admit  after  the  doctrine  is  believed,  and  after  a  previous 
subjection  to  the  school."     Dissertat.  Sac.  1.  ii.  c.  xiv.  |  6. 

Mr.  Baxter:  "  Go,  disciple  me  all  nations,  baptizing  them.  As 
for  those  that  say  they  are  discipled  by  baptizing,  and  not  before 
baptizing,  they  speak  not  the  sense  of  that  text ;  nor  that  which 
is  true  or  rational,  if  they  mean  it  absolutely  as  so  spoken :  else 
why  should  one  be  baptized  more  than  another  ?  .  .  .  .  This  is 
not  like  some  occasional  historical  mention  of  baptism ;  but  it 
is  the  very  commission  of  Christ  to  his  Apostles  for  preaching 
and  baptizing,  and  purposely  expresseth  their  several  works,  in 
their  several  places  and  order.  Their  first  task  is,  by  teaching, 
to  make  disciples,  who  are,  by  Mark,  called  believers.  The 
second  work  is  to  baptize  them,  whereto  is  annexed  the  promise 
of  their  salvation.  The  third  work  is  to  teach  them  all  other 
things,  which  are  afterwards  to  be  learned  in  the  school  of 
Christ.  To  contemn  this  order,  is  to  renounce  all  rules  of 
order ;  for,  where  can  we  expect  to  find  it,  if  not  here  ?  I  pro- 
fess my  conscience  is  fully  satisfied  from  this  text,  that  it  is  one 
sort  of  faith,  even  saving,  that  must  go  before  baptism,  and  the 
profession  whereof  the  minister  must  expect."  Disputat.  of 
Eight  to  Sac.  pp.  91,  149,  150. 

It  would  be  superfluous  to  add  any  thing  farther,  either  in 
development  or  in  proof  of  the  fact  that  the  Lawgiver  and  King 
of  Zion  did  command  his  Apostles  to  first  preach  the  gospel  to 
every  nation,  in  order  to  the  conversion  of  the  people  ;  then  to 
"baptize  those  who  believed ;  and,  in  the  last  place,  to  teach  them 
to  observe  and  do  all  things  whatsoever  he  commanded  them. 
In  the  judgment  of  those  learned  and  candid  Pedobaptists  just 
now  quoted,  with  whose  judgment  we  fully  concur,  the  Evan- 
gelist Mark  gives  the  full  substance  and  meaning  of  Matthew's 
version  of  the  law  of  baptism,  in  quoting  the  sense  rather  than 


224  SUBJECTS  OP   BAPTISM. 

the  words  spoken.  *'  Go  ye  into  all  the  world;  preach  the  gos- 
pel to  every  creature:  he  that  believeth  it,  and  is  baptized,  shall 
be  saved ;  and  he  that  believeth  it  not  shall  be  damned/^  The 
word,  indeed,  must  be  spoken  before  it  can  be  heard ;  it  must 
be  heard  and  understood  before  it  can  be  believed ;  it  must  be 
believed  before  it  can  be  obeyed ;  and  it  must  be  obeyed  before 
it  can  be  enjoyed.  It  is  not  in  the  power  of  angels  or  of  men  to 
change  this  order  of  things.  Hence,  no  one  can  enjoy  the  bene- 
fits of  Christian  baptism  that  receives  it  in  any  other  way  than 
that  suggested  in  his  divine  law.  On  the  avithority  of  the  Apos- 
tle Matthew  and  the  Evangelist  Mark,  we  conclude,  that  the 
express  will  and  command  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is,  that 
none  but  an  intelligent  professing  believer  of  the  apostolic  gos- 
pel is  a  fit  and  lawful  subject  of  Christian  baptism. 

Our  second  argument  is  drawn  from  the  divinely- recorded  prac- 
tice of  the  Apostles,  to  whom  this  commission  was  given  while 
they  were  employed  in  executing  it.  There  is  one  historical 
book  in  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Christian  Institution  that  re- 
cords the  acts  and  deeds  of  the  Apostles  under  this  commission. 
Luke  the  Evangelist  is  the  author  of  that  book  of  the  Acts  of 
THE  Apostles.  To  it,  then,  we  shall  look  for  a  matter  of  fact 
exposition  of  the  sense  in  which  the  Apostles  understood  the 
commission. 

In  the  first  chapter  of  this  book  of  Apostolic  acts,  we  are  in- 
formed, that  the  Messiah  himself,  in  person,  immediately  before 
his  ascension,  gave  them  specific  directions  where  to  commence 
and  whither  to  proceed,  into  all  the  world,  in  preaching  the 
gospel  to  the  whole  human  family.  He  commands  them  to 
begin  at  Jerusalem  ;  thence  to  proceed  through  Judea ;  thence 
to  Samaria,  and  thence  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth. 
Now,  a  few  examples  of  this  mode  of  procedure  in  discharging 
these  duties  will  fully  demonstrate  how  they  understood  the 
divine  precept  under  which  they  acted.  We  shall,  then,  exa- 
mine a  few  cases. 

On  Pentecost,  Peter  first  preached  the  Christian  gospel  as 
developed  and  consummated  by  the  resurrection,  ascension,  and 
glorification  of  the  Lord  Messiah.  Thousands  heard  him,  were 
convicted  of  guilt,  and  sued  for  mercy.  They  asked  him  what 
they  should  do.  His  response  is  most  apropos  to  the  question 
propounded — ^'Repent  and  he  ha^Mzed,  ecery  one  of  you,"  said 
he.     He  does  not  say,  "  Be  baptized  and  repent ;"  but,  "  Repent 


SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM.  '225 

and  be  "baptized,  every  one  of  you."  Here,  there  appears  to  "be 
a  strict  conformity  to  the  Baptist  John  in  his  "baptism  of  re- 
pentance for  the  remission  of  sins." 

But  still  more  definite  and  precise  the  historian  in  narrating 
who  were  that  day  baptized.  "2%€?i,"  says  Luke,  ^^they  that 
gladly  received  his  tvord  loere  haptized.^^  None  else — ^not  one; 
for  so  the  words  imply.  He  could  not  have  said  that  they  who 
gladly  received  his  word  were  baptized,  if  infants  and  persons 
not  professing  to  have  received  it  had  been  baptized.  He  ought 
in  that  case  to  have  said,  that  they  who  gladly  received  his  word, 
with  all  their  families,  were  baptized.  Then  we  should  have 
had  no  objections  to  baptizing  those  who  neither  gladly  receive 
the  word  nor  profess  to  have  received  it. 

Passing  from  Jerusalem  to  Samaria,  at  which  place  we  have 
the  second  report  of  Christian  baptism,  we  find  Philip,  acting 
the  evangelist,  preaching  the  gospel  to  the  people  of  Samaria. 
They  hear  him  with  candour,  and  multitudes  believe.  "When," 
says  Luke,  "they  believed  Philip  preaching  the  things  concern- 
ing the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they 
were  baptized  both  men  and  women."*  "Then  Simon  himself 
believed  also,  and  when  he  was  baptized  he  continued  with 
Philip,"  &c.  This  is  the  whole  report  of  preaching  the  gospel 
and  of  baptizing  in  Samaria.  It  is,  then,  indisputably  evident, 
from  the  narrative,  that  Philip  interpreted  the  commission  as  we 
have  done ;  or,  what  is  the  same  thing,  he  followed  the  example 
of  Peter  in  Jerusalem,  on  Pentecost,  who,  doubtless,  infallibly 
BO  understood  it.  None  but  ''believing  men  and  women"  were 
baptized  by  Philip.  Had  there  been  children  or  babes  baptized, 
he  would,  certainly,  have  specified  them  when  going  into  the 
details  of  "men  and  women."  But  they  are  excluded  not  only 
by  the  omission  of  adding  to  the  men  and  women  the  word 
children ;  but  by  giving  to  them  the  reputation  of  believing  men 
and  women.  Had  the  historian  only  said,  "When  they  heard 
Philip  preaching  the  gospel,  they  were  baptized,  men,  women, 
and  children,"  there  would  have  been,  at  least,  some  plausibi- 
lity in  pleading  for  the  baptism  of  babes.  Even  then,  however, 
it  would  have  been  incumbent  on  any  one  pleading  for  infant 
baptism  from  such  language,  to  prove  that  these  children,  who 
are  classed  among  them  that  heard  the  gospel,  were  speechless 

*  Acts  viii.  12. 


226  SUBJECTS   OF  BAPTISM. 

babes.  But,  as  it  is,  there  is  not  the  slightest  ground  to  plead 
for  infant  subjects  of  baptism,  from  any  precept,  precedent,  hint, 
or  allusion,  that  could  warrant  such  a  practice,  from  any  thing 
which  as  yet  occurred  in  Jerusalem,  Judea,  or  Samaria.  We 
shall,  then,  next  proceed  with  the  Evangelist  Philip  to  another 
field  of  labour. 

We  next  find  him  preaching  in  the  desert  to  a  political  grandee, 
the  treasurer  of  an  Ethiopian  queen — a  gentleman,  no  doubt,  of 
distinguished  moral  character.  We  have  the  narrative  of  this 
baptism  in  the  same  chapter  with  that  of  the  Samaritan  people. 
He  solicited  baptism,  after  hearing  Philip  preach  the  gospel 
from  the  Prophet  Isaiah.  Being  a  Jew,  by  nation,  he  was  well 
read  in  the  Prophets  ;  and,  so  soon  as  his  doubts  and  difficulties 
were  removed,  he  desired  to  submit  to  the  Lord.  We  hold  the 
report  of  his  baptism  peculiarly  important  in  this  discussion ; 
not  because  he  was  a  well-educated  adult  believer  of  the  gospel, 
but  because  of  the  answer  given  to  him  from  the  Evangelist 
Philip,  on  his  demanding  baptism — What  hinders,  or  what 
should  hinder  my  being  baptized,  Philip  ?  Nothing,  virtually 
responds  the  preacher,  but  the  want  of  faith.  "  I  believe,  sir," 
said  he,  ''that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God."  Then  he  baptized 
him.  This  is  a  very  striking  proof  that  a  profession  of  faith  is, 
in  all  cases,  essential  to  the  reception  of  Christian  baptism. 
Had  not  the  question  been  thus  formally  propounded  and  re- 
sponded to,  there  might  have  been  some  suspicion  concerning 
the  proper  qualification  of  the  subject  of  baptism.  Now,  as 
there  is  one  baptism  that  makes  faith  an  essential  prerequisite, 
it  lies  upon  those  who  assume  a  baptism  without  faith,  to  prove 
that  there  are  two  baptisms — one  requiring  faith,  and  one  requi- 
ring flesh  only  in  the  subject. 

The  next  case  of  baptism  reported  in  the  history  of  the  labours 
of  the  Apostles,  is  that  of  Saul  of  Tarsus.  We  need  not  prove 
that  he  was  a  believing  subject.  This  case  is  circumstantially 
narrated  in  the  ninth  chapter  of  this  book.  "Arise,  brother 
Paul,  and  be  baptized  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  upon  the 
name  of  the  Lord."*  "And  he  arose  and  was  baptized."  This 
is  a  baptism  that  indicates  faith,  repentance,  and  a  desire  to 
honour  the  Lord,  on  the  part  of  him  who  solicits  it. 

A  case,  that  comes  nearer  to  us  than  any  other,  is  reported  in 

*  Acts  ix.  16, 18,  22. 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  227 

the  tenth  chapter  of  this  book.  It  is  the  conversion  of  the  Gen- 
tiles. Cornelius  and  his  family,  his  kindred  and  friends,  were 
assembled  at  Cesarea,  and  the  Apostle  Peter  is  especially  sent  to 
open  to  them  the  kingdom  of  God.  A  more  attentive  and  more 
deeply-interested  audience  never,  we  presume,  assembled,  than 
the  first  Gentile  auditory.  Peter  opened  to  them  the  door  of  faith. 
While  he  spoke  the  word  to  them  all,  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  upon 
them  all.  They  all  spoke  in  foreign  tongues.  They  all,  of 
course,  believed,  and  were  all  baptized  by  the  authority  of  Peter. 

Some  seven  years  are  now  passed  away,  since  the  commission 
was  given  to  the  Apostles.  In  the  mean  time,  great  multitudes 
have  been  converted.  Myriads  have  been  immersed  in  Jeru- 
salem, Judea,  and  Samaria.  The  Gentiles,  too,  are  visited,  and 
many  of  them  believed  and  are  baptized:  but,  as  yet,  not  one 
word,  allusion,  or  reference,  that  could  lead  any  one  to  imagine 
that  an  infant  had  been  ever  thought  of  as  a  subject  of  Christian 
baptism. 

The  next  cases  of  baptism  reported  are  that  of  a  lady  of  Thya- 
tira,  called  Lydia,  and  her  family ;  and  that  of  the  Philippian 
jailor,  and  his  family.  In  these  families,  our  Pedobaptist  friends 
are  peculiarly  interested.  Having  borrowed  several  Papal  tra- 
ditions from  the  Roman  Church,  amongst  which  is  that  of  infant 
christening,  sometimes  called  infant  baptism,  and  being,  from 
family  associations,  desirous  to  retain  them,  they  seize  these  two 
cases  with  great  earnestness,  and  from  them  endeavour  to  ex- 
tract some  authority  for  this  consecrated  custom. 

On  any  subject  of  importance  pertaining  to  this  life,  we  would 
not  impose  upon  ourselves  so  inconsiderately  by  gratuitous  as- 
sumptions and  fallacious  reasonings  as  in  this  most  important 
of  all  subjects — the  salvation  of  our  souls — the  will  of  the  Lord 
concerning  our  duty  and  happiness.  From  the  beginning  of 
Matthew,  down  to  the  sixteentJi  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  we 
have  neither  precept  nor  precedent,  neither  hint  nor  allusion  on 
the  subject  of  infant  baptism.  Notwithstanding  this,  there  are 
some  of  our  Pedobaptist  brethren  who  seek  to  find  a  warrant 
for  this  tradition  at  so  late  a  period,  and  in  cases  and  details 
that  have  not  a  single  allusion  to  it. 

We  must,  then,  candidly  examine  these  two  cases.  Lydia,  it 
is  assumed,  was  a  married  lady.  It  is  assumed  she  had  children. 
It  is  also  assumed  that  some  of  her  children  were  infant  children. 
It  is  also  assumed  that  she  had  these  infant  children  with  her, 


228  SUBJECTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

although  three  hundred  miles  from  home ;  for  she  was  now  at 
Philippi  on  business,  her  home  being  at  Thyatira.  On  these 
four  assumptions  is  the  first  argument  for  infant  baptism  drawn 
from  the  four  gospels  and  Acts  of  Apostles.  Now  it  being  much 
more  probable  that  Lydia  was  an  unmarried  rather  than  a  mar- 
ried lady,  being  a  dealer  in  purple  and  in  ladies^  apparel, 
having  with  her  other  females  and  servants  on  a  journey  from 
home,  the  chances  are  all  against  these  four  assumptions. 
What  a  hypothetical  basis  for  a  divine  institution  !  Was  there 
ever  a  positive  ordinance  founded  upon  such  assumptions  !  But 
the  internal  evidences  are  still  more  fatal  to  the  hypothesis.  For 
she  represents  herself  as  a  householder  and  the  head  of  a  family. 
"  If,"  said  she  to  the  Apostle  and  his  suite,  *'  you  have  judged  me 
faithful  to  the  Lord,  come  into  my  house  and  continue  there." 
It  was  a  delicate  thing  for  a  Christian  lady,  most  probably  a 
maid,  to  invite  the  Apostle  and  his  fellow-travellers  to  sojourn 
with  her.  Hence  she  places  this  matter  upon  Christian  grounds. 
If  you  have  confidence  in  my  devotion  to  the  Lord,  make  my 
house  your  home.  They  did  so,  and  the  sequel  shows  that  her 
household  was  composed  rather  of  adults  than  of  infants  :  for, 
eays  Luke,  before  the  Apostle  left  Philippi,  on  coming  out  of  jail 
he  visited  Lydia's  house,  and  seeing  the  brethren  there  he  com- 
forted them  and  departed.  There  is  not,  then,  by  any  incident 
or  allusion  in  this  whole  afi"air,  the  slightest  ground  for  the  hy- 
pothesis that  there  was  an  infant  in  the  household  of  Lydia. 

The  jailor's  family  is  as  barren  of  encouragement  and  of  favour 
to  the  patrons  of  infant  baptism,  as  that  of  Lydia.  His  family 
were  all  baptized,  it  is  true.  But  who  are  they?  Infants? 
That  would  be  worse  than  a  gratuitous  assumption :  for  we  are 
told  that  before  they  were  baptized  he  "  spake  the  word  of  the 
Lord  to  him  and  to  all  that  were  in  his  house ;"  and  we  are 
again  informed  that  after  his  baptism  and  that  of  his  family,  the 
jailor  "  rejoiced,  believing  in  God  with  all  his  family."  These 
declarations  negative,  in  very  intelligible  terms,  the  assumption 
that  infants  were  baptized  in  the  household  of  the  jailor  by  the 
authority  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  Paul  did  not  preach 
the  gospel  to  babes,  nor  did  they  rejoice,  believing  in  God,  be- 
cause of  blessings  which  they  then  neither  could  understand  nor 
receive. 

There  yet  remain  two  other  cases  of  baptism  reported  in  the 
book  of  the  Acts.    These  are  the  cases  of  the  baptism  of  the  Co- 


SUBJECTS   OP   BAPTISM.  22^ 

rinthians  and  certain  Ephesians.  The  cases  are  very  obvious. 
That  of  the  Corinthians  is  very  beautifully  told  in  the  following 
words,  when  Paul  preached  in  Corinth: — "Crispus,  the  ruler 
of  the  synagogue,  believed  in  the  Lord,  with  all  his  family  ;  and 
many  of  the  Corinthians,  hearing,  believed,  and  were  baptized/' 
What  a  beautiful  comment  on  the  saying,  "  Faith  comes  by  hear- 
ing— by  hearing  the  word  of  the  Lord.'^  The  Corinthians  first 
heard,  then  believed,  and  then  were  baptized.  Without  hearing 
there  is  no  faith,  and  without  faith  there  is  no  fitness  for  bap- 
tism, and  without  the  profession  of  that  faith  no  one  can  be  a  fit 
subject  of  Christian  baptism. 

It  is,  indeed,  unquestionably  true,  that  faith  in  the  heart  is 
essential  to  the  enjoyment  of  every  Christian  precept,  promise, 
and  covenanted  blessing;  but  faith  in  the  heart  unprofessed,  or 
Christ  in  the  heart  unconfessed,  would  not,  according  to  the 
practical  decisions  of  the  Christian  Apostles,  authorize  any  pas- 
tor, evangelist,  or  professor  to  baptize  any  man  or  woman. 
*'  With  the  heart  man  believeth  for  righteousness,  and  with  the 
mouth  confession  is  made  for  salvation."  Hence  the  call  upon 
the  candidate — ^'Dost  thou  believe ?"  or  "If  thou  believest  with 
all  thy  heart  thou  mayest.'^  The  confession  elicited  by  such  a 
formal  way  of  putting  the  question  is — "  I  believe  that  Jesus  is 
the  Messiah  the  Son  of  God."  Many  of  the  Corinthians,  we  are 
informed,  heard,  believed,  and  confessed.  Now  had  they  not 
confessed  their  faith,  could  either  Paul,  or  Luke,  or  any  one 
else  say  that  they  believed  ? 

The  case  of  the  twelve  Ephesians,  reported  in  the  19th  chap- 
ter of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  is  very  remarkable  and  wor- 
thy of  special  consideration.  These  twelve  men,  when  asked 
"  whether  they  had  received  the  Holy  Spirit  since  they  believed," 
declared  that,  so  far  from  having  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  they 
had  not  so  much  as  heard  that  "there  was  any  Holy  Spirit." 
Paul  responds — ^'Into  what,  then,  were  you  baptized?"  "  Into 
John's  baptism,"  they  immediately  replied.  The  mystery  was 
then  resolved.  In  the  formula  of  John's  baptism  there  was  no 
Holy  Spirit  named.  But  in  the  Christian  baptism  there  was, 
for  so  the  commission  prescribed.  This  is  a  full  answer  to  all 
that  class  of  speculators  who  afl&rm  that  because  Luke  does  not 
state  that  the  formula  commanded  was  always  pronounced  by 
the  Apostles — the  Apostles  did  not  baptize  into  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.    They  cannot 

20 


230  SUBJECTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

appreciate  the  difference  between  baptizing  in  the  name  or  by  the 
authority  of  the  Lord,  and  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  or  into  the 
name  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

The  fact  here  stated,  that  these  Ephesians  had  not  heard  of 
the  name  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  intimates  that  they  had  lived  re- 
mote from  the  fields  cultivated  by  the  Apostles.  They  had  not 
heard  of  the  affairs  of  Pentecost,  and  consequently  of  Christian 
baptism.  But  that  does  not  teach  us  that  they  had  been  bap- 
tized during  John's  ministry,  but  rather  since  it  had  ceased. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  confessing  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  of  being 
baptized  into  the  new  revelation  of  God,  or  "  into  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit."*  That 
these  tvrelve  Ephesians  were  now  immersed  into  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  is  unequivocally  affirmed.  After  this,  on  the  impo- 
sition of  the  hands  of  the  Apostles,  they  received  the  peculiar 
gift  of  that  age — they  immediately  "  spake  with  tongues  and 
prophesied."  As  rationally  and  as  credibly  might  any  one  af- 
firm that  these  twelve  Ephesians  were  twelve  infants,  as  affirm 
that  there  is  "  in  the  four  gospels  or  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles" one  word  or  syllable  in  favour  of  this  Papal  assumption. 
Tradition,  and  tradition  only,  and  that  from  no  reputable  foun- 
tain, is  the  only  protection  and  authority  for  infant  baptism. 

But  this  is  not  strong  enough.  Positive  laws  imply  their  nega- 
tive. If  the  negative  commandment,  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal,"  im- 
ply thoii  shalt  be  lionest ;  or  if  the  positive  precept,  "Honour  thy 
father  and  thy  mother,"  is  equivalent  to  tlion  shalt  not  dishonour 
thy  father  or  thy  mother,  then,  to  say  the  least,  the  law,  "  If  thou 
believest  thou  may  est,"  is  equivalent  to  another  law,  "  If  thou 
believest  not  thou  mayest  not  be  baptized."  Hence  the  Lord 
promised  salvation  not  to  him  who  is  only  baptized,  but  to  him 
who  believeth  and  is  baptized. 

The  divinely  inspired  history  of  the  Christian  church,  down 
to  the  C4th  year  of  the  Christian  era,  has  now  been  fully  ex- 
amined, and  every  case  of  baptism  on  record  considered.  The 
commission  enacted  preaching,  baptizing,  and  teaching.  The 
Apostles  did  accordingly  first  preach  the  gospel  to  every  indi- 
vidual whom  they  baptized;     Then  they  immersed  just  so  many 

*  The  childish  efforts  of  Dr.  John  Gill,  and  almost  all  the  old  Baptist  expositors, 
to  make  it  appear  that  these  twelve  men  were  not  baptized  into  the  Christian  faith 
on  this  occasion,  are  so  perfectly  futile  that  it  would  be  a  waste  of  time  to  expose 
the  fallacy  of  their  expositions. 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  231 

as  said  they  believed  the  gospel.  And,  in  the  last  place,  taught 
them  what  they  must  do  to  please  the  Lord,  to  comfort  their 
brethren,  to  convert  the  world,  and  to  make  their  own  calling 
and  election  sure.  When  the  baptized  are  spoken  of,  they  are 
represented  as  hearing  the  gospel  first,  then  as  believing  it,  and 
then  as  being  baptized.  This  is  the  uniform  and  immutable 
practice  during  the  apostolic  age. 

In  the  two  households  reported  in  the  Acts  of  Apostles,  to 
which  not  a  few  look  for  countenance  and  encouragement  in  their 
infant  baptism,  we  find  not  a  hint  or  circumstance  looking  in 
that  direction.  Indeed,  so  unequivocal  is  the  testimony  of  these 
households  in  favour  of  believing  subjects,  and  believing  subjects 
only,  that  all  sensible  and  candid  Pedobaptists  give  them  up. 
A  few  citations  from  some  eminent  critics  and  commentators  on 
the  case  of  Lydia  and  that  of  the  jailor  may  serve  as  an  expo- 
nent of  the  views  of  the  most  learned  and  candid  Pedobaptist 
commentators. 

Dr.  Whitby,  Acts  xvi.  15,  Paraphrase :  "  And  when  she,  and 
those  of  her  household,  ivere  instructed  in  the  Christian  faith,  in 
the  nature  of  baptism  required  by  it,  she  was  baptized  and  her 
household." 

Limborch:  "An  undoubted  argument,  therefore,  cannot  be 
drawn  from  this  instance,  by  which  it  may  be  demonstrated  that 
infants  were  baptized  by  the  Apostles.  It  might  be  that  all  in 
her  house  were  of  a  mature  age  ;  who,  as  in  the  exercise  of  a 
right  understanding  they  believed,  so  they  were  able  to  make  a 
public  profession  of  that  faith  when  they  received  baptism.'^ 

T.  Lawson,  referring  to  this  argument,  says,  "Families  may 
be  without  children ;  they  may  be  grown  up,  &c.  So  it  is  a 
wild  inference  to  ground  infant  baptism  upon." 

Assembly  of  Divines :  "Of  the  city  of  Thyatira — a  city  of 
Asia — here  dwelt  Lydia,  that  devout  servant  of  God."  "  And 
entered  into  the  house  of  Lydia :  doubtless  to  confirm  them  in 
the  faith  which  they  had  preached  to  them — Lydia  and  hers, 
hearing  of  their  miraculous  deliverance,  could  not  but  be  com- 
forted and  confirmed  in  the  truth."     Annot.  on  Acts  xvi.  14,  40. 

From  the  same  source  we  quote  Doddridge,  Matthew  Henry, 
and  Calvin,  who  stand  side  by  side  in  my  library : — 

Doddridge :  "TJiou  shalt  be  saved  and  tliine  house.  The  mean- 
ing cannot  be  that  the  eternal  salvation  of  his  family  could  be 
secured  by  his  faith ;  but  that  if  they  also  themselves  believed, 
they  should  be  entitled  to  the  same  spiritual  and  everlasting 
blessings  with  himself;  which  Paul  might  the  rather  add,  as  it 


S3^  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

is  probable  that  many  of  them,  under  this  terrible  alarm,  might 
have  attended  the  master  of  the  family  into  the  dungeon." 

Matthew  Henry :  "  The  voice  of  rejoicing,  veith  that  of  salva- 
tion, was  heard  in  the  jailor's  house.  He  rejoiced,  believing  in 
God,  with  all  his  house:  there  was  none  in  his  house  that  re- 
fused to  be  baptized,  and  so  made  a  jar  in  the  ceremony  ;  but 
they  were  unanimous  in  embracing  the  gospel,  which  added 
much  to  the  joy." 

Calvin.  "Luke  commends  the  pious  zeal  of  the  jailor,  be- 
cause he  dedicated  his  whole  house  to  the  Lord  ;  in  which  also 
the  grace  of  God  illustriously  appeared,  because  it  brought  the 
whole  family  to  a  pious  consent." 

But  I  know  not  whether  the  candour  and  justice  of  these 
Pedobaptists  that  make  such  admissions  as  those  of  Doddridge, 
Henry,  Calvin,  &c.,  or  the  disingenuousness  and  violence  of 
those  commentators,  such  as  Burkett,  D'Oyly,  and  Mant,  and 
who  say  with  Burkett,  "  Having  been  so  many  ages  in  posses- 
sion of  this  privilege,  [infant  baptism,]  we  may  more  reasonably 
require  of  the  Anabaptists  to  prove  by  express  Scripture  that 
children  [infants  he  means]  were  not  baptized  by  the  Apostles 
"when  they  baptized  whole  families,  whole  nations  according  to 
their  commission,  than  they  can  require  of  us  to  prove  that  they 
were."  Notes  on  Acts  xvi.  15.  This  from  an  Episcopalian  com- 
mentator— "  the  Vicar  and  Lecturer  of  Dedham" — is  no  weak 
proof  of  the  childish  imbecility  which  the  advocates  of  infant 
baptism  are  obliged  to  assume  in  defence  of  their  tradition. 
What  logician,  or  lawyer,  or  common-sense  reasoner  ever  re- 
quires his  opponent  to  prove  a  negative !  Instead  of  proving 
that  there  were  infants  in  those  houses,  he  asks  those  whom  he 
nicknames  Anabaptists  to  prove  that  there  were  not  infants  in 
them ! !  Although  we  have  shown  from  the  descriptions  given 
of  those  families  or  households,  from  their  hearing  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  from  their  rejoicing  in  God ;  and  in  the  case  of  the 
household  of  Stephanas,  "  the  first  fruits"  or  first  converts  men- 
tioned in  the  church  of  Corinth,  from  their  having  addicted 
themselves  to  "the  ministry  of  the  saints,"  that  there  could  not 
have  been  infants  in  those  families,  or  any  one  baptized  but  be- 
lievers ;  still  it  is  not  in  logic,  or  law,  or  reason,  to  ask  or  com- 
pel any  one  to  prove  a  negative.  It  is  passed  into  a  universal 
law  that  the  burthen  of  proof  always  lies  upon  him  who  affirms 
that  there  were  infants  in  those  families.  Should  anyone  place 
himself  upon  the  estate  of  a  Burkett  or  a  Clark,  and  occupy  hia 


SUBJECTS   OP   BAPTISM.  233 

premises  for  as  many  years  as  the  centuries  of  infant  baptism  or 
infant  communion,  and  when  asked  to  prove  his  right  or  show 
his  title  to  occupy  the  estate  claimed  by  his  reverence,  should 
say,  "  Prove,  sir,  that  I  have  no  such  right,  and  then,  sir,  but 
not  till  then,  will  I  give  up  my  possession."  I  would  be  pleased 
to  hear  with  what  attitude  and  tone  his  Grace  would  reply, 
Show  me  your  right,  sir  ;  hut  ask  me  not  to  show  what  you  have 
not  got. 

The  plea  of  ancient  tradition  is  the  strength  of  Popery  and 
the  weakness  of  Protestantism.  We  advocate  not  ancient,  but 
(yriginal  Christianity.  The  plea  of  high  antiquity  or  tradition 
has  long  been  the  bulwark  of  error.  It  cleaves  to  its  beloved 
mother,  Tradition,  hoary  Tradition,  with  an  affection  that  in- 
creases as  she  becomes  old  and  feeble.  Errorists  of  all  schools 
are  exceedingly  devout  and  dutiful  so  far  as  the  precept  "Ho- 
nour thy  father  and  thy  mother'^  is  concerned. 


CHAPTER  III. 

SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISM  AND  SUBJECTS  OF  CIRCUMCISION  CONTRASTED. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  on  any  particular  subject  of  inquiry, 
can  be  clearly  and  satisfactorily  ascertained  only  by  a  full  in- 
duction of  all  that  is  found  in  it  upon  that  subject.  When  the 
induction  is  perfect  and  complete,  and  fully  comprehended  on 
any  one  point,  we  never  can  have  any  more  divine  light  upon 
that  subject.  This  is  our  method  of  learning  and  of  teaching 
what  the  Holy  Spirit  has  taught  on  any  given  question. 

Who  may,  with  divine  approbation,  be  baptized  ?  or,  as  usu- 
ally expressed,  who  are  the  proper  subjects  of  Christian  bap- 
tism ?  is  the  question  now  under  consideration.  It  having  been 
universally  admitted  that  baptism  is  an  ordinance  of  the  New 
Testament,  or  an  ordinance  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  inquiry  upon 
the  action,  subject,  or  design  of  Christian  baptism  must  be  con- 
fined to  an  induction  of  whatever  is  said  on  any  of  these  topics 
by  the  writers  of  that  volume.  So  far,  we  have  pursued  this 
method.  Nothing  that  was  written  before  or  after  the  apostolic 
age  can  be  rationally  admitted  as  evidence  in  this  case. 

In  the  preceding  chapter,  we  not  only  examined  the  commis- 


234         SUBJECTS  or  baptism. 

sion  given  to  the  Apostles,  whicli  instituted  and  ordained  Chris- 
tian baptism ;  but  also  adduced  and  examined  every  case  of 
baptism  reported  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  from  the  giving 
of  the  commission  to  the  end  of  that  treatise — a  period  of  some 
thirty  years.  The  book,  indeed,  furnishes  only  some  nine  cases 
in  all ;  but  they  are  of  a  peculiarly  striking,  impressive,  and 
circumstantial  character,  and  include  under  them  several  thou- 
sand persons.  The  first  of  these  occurs  in  Jerusalem,  and  em- 
braces three  thousand  Pentecostian  converts.  The  subjects  of 
that  baptism  are  represented  as  believers — as  persons  who  had 
previously  "  gladly  received  the  word,"  and  were  then  baptized. 
Not  one  was  baptized  who  had  not  gladly  received  the  gospel 
that  Peter  preached. 

The  city  of  Samaria  is  next  on  record.  "When  the  citizens  of 
Samaria  heard  and  believed  Philip,  "preaching  the  things  con- 
cerning the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they 
were  baptized,  both  men  and  women."  The  word  children  is 
not  added  ;  because  there  were  none  such  baptized.  The  parti- 
cularity of  detail  which  mentioned  "men  and  women"  would, 
doubtless,  have  mentioned  infants,  if  there  had  been  any  such 
baptized. 

The  Ethiopian  nobleman  is  the  third  case.  That  he  professed 
faith  is  just  as  clearly  stated  as  that  he  was  baptized;  or  as  that, 
after  baptism,  "  he  went  on  his  way  rejoicing." 

Saul  of  Tarsus,  afterwards  Paul  the  Apostle,  is  the  fourth 
case.  Then  come  the  Gentiles  at  Cesarea  Philippi,  and  Peter's 
Buccess  among  them  as  the  fifth  case.  The  whole  audience  be- 
lieved, received  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  were  baptized.  Down  to 
this  time,  we  have  the  prominent  details  of  almost  seven  years 
from  the  ascension,  and  the  addition  of  not  less  than  ten  thou- 
sand persons  to  the  original  one  hundred  and  twenty,  and  not 
one  infant  or  child  as  yet  named  or  alluded  to  as  having  been 
baptized. 

Then  we  have  the  JiouseJiold  of  Lydia  and  of  the  Philippian 
jailer;  in  neither  of  which  is  there  any  evidence  that  there  was 
any  departure  from  the  preceding  usage.  Such  are  the  sixth 
and  seventh  cases  on  record.  Then  have  we  the  case  of  the 
Corinthians  and  that  of  the  Ephesians ;  in  both  of  which  we 
are  expressly  infi)rmed  that  they  ''heard,  believed,  and  ivere  baj)- 
iized."  So  that,  in  the  Four  Gospels,  and  in  the  Acts  of  tiic 
Apostles,  reaching  down  to  the  year  of  our  Lord  03,  in  which 


SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM.  235 

vre  have  the  accounts  of  many  myriads  of  converts,  comprising 
Jews,  Samaritans,  and  Gentiles,  we  have  no  example  of  the  bap- 
tism of  any  other  than  believing  and  professing  persons.  May 
we  not,  then,  say  with  the  utmost  assurance,  that,  so  far  as  all 
sacred  history  deposes,  there  is  not  any  evidence  whatever  that 
a  single  infant  or  non-professing  person  had  been  admitted  to 
baptism  during  the  lives  of  the  Apostles  ? 

What  now  remains  of  biblical  authoritative  evidence,  except 
the  Apostles'  Epistles  ?  To  these,  then,  we  must  next  turn  our 
attention.  We  shall  take  them  up  in  the  order  in  which  they 
usually  stand  in  the  received  version.  In  examining  them,  we 
may  expect  to  find  sundry  allusions  to  Christian  baptism,  and 
from  these,  doubtless,  we  may  infer  some  things  corroborative 
of  the  historical  evidence  now  before  us. 

In  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Komans,  we  find  a 
very  lucid  reference  to  baptism,  indicative  of  the  character  of 
its  subjects.  The  Apostle  affirms,  that  "so  many  of  us  as  have 
been  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  have  been  baptized  into  his 
death ;  therefore,  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into 
death — that  like  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  glory 
of  his  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life  1" 
Can  this  apply  to  infants  ?  Have  they  been  baptized  into 
Christ's  death,  and  risen  with  him  to  walk  in  a  new  life  ?  This 
putting  off  of  the  old  man  and  putting  on  the  new  is  not  the  work 
of  infantile  minds,  but  of  those  whose  senses  are  exercised  to 
discern  both  good  and  evil.  Had  the  Romans  been  accustomed 
to  have  their  infants  baptized,  could  Paul  have  thus  written  to 
them? 

There  are  more  frequent  allusions  to  baptism  in  the  first  let- 
ter to  the  Corinthians  than  in  any  other  epistle.  In  Acts  xviii., 
we  have  learned  who  were  first  baptized  in  Corinth — men  and 
women  only.  We  shall  now  inquire  whether,  in  his  letters  to 
them,  Paul  indicates  that  any  other  than  men  and  women,  or  per- 
sons of  age  and  reflection,  had,  at  the  date  of  this  epistle,  been 
baptized.  1  Cor.  i.  13,  he  asks  the  question,  "Were  you  baptized 
into  the  name  of  Paul  V  Could  any  persons  baptized  in  in- 
fancy answer  such  a  question  ?  Could  they  say  either  in  or 
into  what  name,  by  ivJiom  or  Jbr  what  they  had  been  baptized  ? 
This  alone  intimates  that  the  primitive  subjects  of  baptism 
could  remember  and  reflect  upon  the  design  of  their  baptism,  aa 
well  as  the  time  of  it. 


236  SUBJECTS   OF   BAPTISM. 

In  the  same  connection,  he  adds,  "I  thank  God  that  I  bap- 
tized none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gaius.  I  baptized  also  the 
household  of  Stephanas ;  and  I  know  not  whether  I  baptized 
any  other :  for  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the 
gospel."  Unless,  then,  there  should  be  found  some  infants  in 
the  household  of  Stephanas,  there  is  none  in  this  passage. 
But  the  Apostle  relieves  us  from  all  dubiety  on  that  subject,  by 
informing  us  of  the  character  of  this  household :  chap.  xvi.  15, 
"You  know,"  says  he,  "the  family  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the 
first-fruits  of  Achaia,  and  that  they  have  addicted  themselves  to 
the  ministry  of  the  saints."  They  were  not  infants  ;  but  they 
were  the  first  converts  in  Achaia,  and  they  were  remarkable  for 
their  devotion  to  the  service  of  the  saints. 

The  other  allusions  to  baptism,  in  this  epistle,  are  rather  figura- 
tive than  literal  references  to  the  subject.  Chap.  x.  1,  "All  our 
fathers  were  baptized  into  Moses,  in  the  cloud  and  sea ;  and 
they  all  eat  the  mystic  manna  and  drank  the  mystic  rock." 
And,  again,  chap.  xii.  13,  "  For  by  one  Spirit  we  are  baptized 
into  one  body,  whether  Jews  or  Greeks,  and  we  all  have  drunk 
of  the  one  Spirit."  "Else,  what  shall  they  do  who  are  baptized 
for  the  dead,  or  in  the  hope  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  ?" 
These  all  are  indicative  of  thought,  faith,  feeling,  emotion,  and 
hope,  on  the  part  of  the  baptized.  As  yet,  there  is  not  found  a 
single  intimation,  allusion,  or  hint  to  infant  baptism. 

In  the  letter  to  the  Galatians,  we  have  another  reference  to 
baptism.  It  is  found,  chap.  iii.  27  :  "As  many  of  you  as  have 
been  baptized  into  Christ  have  put  on  Christ."  This  passage  is 
very  similar  to  that  quoted  from  Romans.  It  is,  indeed,  more 
definitive  of  the  character  of  those  baptized.  They  had,  with- 
out a  single  exception,  been  professors  of  the  faith.  Of  all  the 
baptized  of  all  the  churches,  in  the  province  of  Galatia,  Paul 
affirms  there  was  not  one  that  had  not  by  a  profession  of  faith 
put  on  Christ.  Could  any  one  say  this  of  all  the  baptized  in 
any  Pedobaptist  church  in  the  world?  AVe,  however,  with  Paul, 
can  say  that  all  the  baptized  in  our  church,  in  the  United  States, 
have  put  on  Christ — have  confessed  and  assumed  him  as  their 
Saviour  and  their  Guide. 

We  have  not  yet  done  with  Paul's  epistles.  To  the  Ephe- 
eians,  he  says,  chap,  iv.,  "There  is  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  bap- 
tism." There  are  not,  then,  infant  baptism  and  adult  baptism ; 
for  these  arc,  certainly,  two  baptisms,  and  not  one.     Sprinkling 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  237 

and  pouring  are  not  one  immersion,  neither  are  immersion  and 
sprinkling  one  pouring :  no  more  are  infant  and  adult  baptism 
one  baptism.  A  baptism  for  sins  pardoned,  and  a  baptism  for 
sins  to  be  pardoned,  or  for  no  pardon  of  sins  at  all,  past,  pre^ 
sent,  or  future,  cannot  be  regarded  as  one  and  the  same  bap- 
tism. In  one  baptism,  there  must  be  a  unity,  as  respects  subjecty 
action,  and  design. 

To  the  Colossians,  chap.  ii.  12,  Paul  speaks  of  baptism  as  to 
the  Komans.  Of  them,  he  says,  they  were  "buried  with  Christ 
in  baptism,  in  which  they  were  also  risen  with  him  tkrovgh  the 
faith  of  the  operation"  (or  work)  "of  God,  who  hath  raised  him 
from  the  dead."  So  far,  and  no  farther,  deposeth  Paul  in  his 
epistles.  We  know  not  another  passage,  in  all  his  writings,  that 
has  any  allusion  whatever  to  the  subjects  of  baptism,  not  now 
laid  before  our  readers.  So  far,  then,  there  is  but  one  voice  in 
all  the  writings  of  Paul  and  Luke,  as  well  as  the  other  Evan- 
gelists, upon  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism.  As  to  John's  bap- 
tism, its  very  name  precludes  the  supposition  that  any  but  per- 
sons of  knowledge  and  faith  could  be  subjects  of  it.  It  is  called 
*'the  baptism  of  repentance:"  of  course,  infants  are  positively 
excluded.  They  need  not  to  repent ;  nor  are  they  capable  of 
repentance.  They  are  not  more  incapable  of  repentance  than 
they  are  of  sins  to  be  repented  of. 

We  have  yet  another  allusion  to  baptism  in  the  Epistles. 
Peter  says,  *'  The  antetype"  of  the  salvation  of  Noah  in  the  ark 
by  water,  is  Christian  baptism.  "Baptism,"  says  he,  "doth 
also  now  save  us  (not  in  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the 
flesh,  but  through  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards 
God,)  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."  Infants  are  wholly 
incapable  of  the  response  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God 
through  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  requires  both 
knowledge,  reflection,  and  faith — of  which  they  are  not  sus- 
ceptible. 

Now,  as  James,  John,  and  Jude  do  not,  in  their  epistles,  allude 
at  all  to  baptism,  we  have  laid  before  the  reader  every  passage 
that  relates  to  the  subject  of  baptism  found  in  the  apostolic  epis- 
tles. We  have,  then,  the  whole  history  of  the  Christian  church 
from  its  origin  to  the  close  of  the  volume  of  inspiration,  whether 
in  the  form  of  history  or  epistolary  details,  without  meeting 
with  a  single  case  of  infant  baptism,  expressed  or  implied.  In 
-all  the  instances  before  us,  there  is  not  one  of  doubtful  disputa- 


238  SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

tion.  This,  of  course,  will  be  satisfactory  to  all  persons  who 
believe  that  Christianity  is  all  found  in  the  New  Testament. 
But  there  are  some  who,  through  an  erroneous  and  defective 
education,  are  led  to  look  for  it  in  the  law  of  Moses,  or  in  the 
philosophy  of  the  schools.  But,  would  it  not  be  a  reflection 
upon  the  character  of  the  Founder  of  Christianity,  if,  in  this 
most  essential  institution,  he  had  failed  to  develop  his  whole 
law  to  his  people  ?  Had  Moses  sent  the  Jews  to  Noah  to  learn 
what,  as  Israelites,  they  should  believe  and  do,  it  would  have 
been,  on  his  part,  an  indication  of  incompetency — a  disparage- 
ment of  his  own  commission.  Still  more  preposterous  and  inad- 
missible the  imputation  against  the  mediatorial  dignity  of  the 
Lord  Messiah,  if,  as  is  assumed,  he  failed  to  reveal  his  own 
ordinances,  and  sent  us  to  Moses  or  left  us  to  the  schools  of 
philosophy  to  ascertain  what  are  the  positive  ordinances  of  his 
religion,  and  what  are  the  first  duties  of  those  who  desire  con- 
stitutionally to  place  themselves  under  his  protection  and  guid- 
ance. We  cannot,  as  intelligent  believers  of  the  plenary  inspi- 
ration, divine  mission,  and  authority  of  our  Lawgiver  and  King, 
for  one  moment  admit  that  he  has  left  us  to  infer  from  Patri- 
archal or  Jewish  customs,  or  from  the  traditions  of  the  elders, 
what  is  expedient  and  fitting  as  respects  the  positive  ordinances 
of  the  New  Institution. 

We  scarcely  know  whether  it  is  compatible  with  the  dignity 
of  our  Master,  that,  in  pleading  his  cause  with  the  corrupters 
of  his  institution,  we  should  gravely  discuss  the  traditions  and 
conjectures  by  which  they  have  made  of  no  efiect  his  laws.  And, 
certainly,  infant  baptism,  so  far  as  it  prevails,  makes  void  and 
annuls  believer's  baptism.  If,  then,  believer's  baptism  be  a 
divine  institution,  it  must  follow  that  they  who  prevent  it  by 
anticipating  it,  and  substituting  for  it  a  human  institution,  do, 
as  far  as  in  them  lies,  annul  and  make  void  the  commandments 
and  ordinances  of  God.  All  that  are  born  in  every  Pedobaptist 
community  are  deprived  of  the  blessings  of  the  Messiah's  insti- 
tution— of  the  pleasure  which  the  Lord  himself  had  in  honour- 
ing the  divine  institution  preached  by  John,  and  which  all  the 
Apostles  and  first  Christians  enjoyed  during  the  times  of  the 
original  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 

AVe,  therefore,  judge  it  expedient  to  advert  to  some  of  the  rea- 
sonings by  which  many  are  deluded,  unintentionally  it  may  be, 
in  some  instances,  on  the  part  of  those  who  so  far  sophisticate 


SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISM.  239 

their  minds,  by  fallacious  reasonings,  into  the  opinion  that  in- 
fant baptism  is  pleasing  to  God,  because  required  by  him. 
They  produce  no  precept  for  it.  They  produce  no  precedent  for 
it  in  all  the  oracles  of  God ;  nay,  they  admit  it  has  neither  di- 
vine precept  nor  example  ;  but  they  infer  that  it  is  pleasing  to 
God  and  useful  to  children,  if  not  to  men,  to  be  early  initiated 
into  the  church,  and  made  members  thereof;  assuming,  as  they 
advance,  that  God's  Church  al^vays  had  infant  members  in  it, 
and  that  they  inherited  blessings  consequent  upon  such  mem- 
bership. They,  moreover,  assume  that  the  Jewish  nation  was 
the  Church  of  God  in  the  same  sense  that  any  community  now 
may  be  called  the  Church  of  God ;  and  that  the  covenant  of  cir- 
cumcision is  the  everlasting  covenant  or  constitution  of  the 
Christian  church,  &c.  &c.  They  even  argue  the  identity,  the 
perfect  and  complete  identity  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  the 
Christian  church.  They  call  it  "the  Jewish  church,"  not  de- 
siring to  call  it  a  nation,  as  God  and  the  people  called  it ;  be- 
cause, to  say  that  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian  church 
are  identiccd,  is  rather  too  gross  a  form  of  speech  for  Christian 
ears. 

In  assuming  these  premises,  which  they  cannot  sustain,  it  lays 
upon  us,  not  the  necessity  of  assailing  their  position  by  formally 
disproving  the  assertion,  but  merely  of  noting  the  grounds  on 
which  they  sometimes  seek  inferentially  to  sustain  it.  But  as 
we  write  not  for  mere  logicians,  but  for  the  great  multitude,  we 
shall  not  stand  upon  logical  niceties,  but  proceed  to  suggest 
Bome  reasons,  and  facts,  too,  why  we  cannot,  for  a  moment, 
admit  the  identity  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian 
church — the  identity  of  their  constitutions,  or  the  essential  or 
formal  identity  of  their  initiatory  rites  and  ordinances.  We 
shall  rely  on  a  few  palpable  facts  and  evidences. 

I.  The  words  nation  and  church  are  neither  literally  nor  spi- 
ritually identical.  A  nation  is  the  whole  population  of  any 
given  country,  with  the  mere  exception  of  sojourners  and  pil- 
grims. A  church  is  a  select  society  called  out  of  a  nation.  A 
nation,  then,  is  the  aggregate  population :  a  church,  a  select 
community.  The  former  comes  from  the  Roman  natio — from 
nasci,  natus,  to  be  born — the  people  born  in  any  given  country ; 
the  latter,  literally,  the  kuriakee,  or  house  of  the  Lord,  from 
ecclesia,  the  called  out,  the  chosen  people.  Hence,  the  Christian 
community  is  a  people  called  out  of  the  world — a  people  formerly 


240  SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

called  out  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  out  of  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man nations.  They  constitute  a  holy  and  spiritual  nation — 
sons  and  daughters  born  to  God.  All,  then,  that  are  born  of  the 
flesh  in  any  country,  are  its  nation ;  and  those  that  are  born  of 
the  Spirit  in  any  nation  are  its  church  in  that  nation.  "A  na- 
tional church"  is,  therefore,  a  great  national  absurdity — an  ab- 
surdity both  in  language  and  in  fact.  If  a  whole  nation  consti- 
tute but  one  society,  how  can  that  one  society  be  called  out  of 
it  ?  What  remains,  when  all  are  taken  ?  In  Roman  Catholic 
nations,  it  is  all  church  and  no  world ;  or  rather,  all  world  and 
no  church. 

II.  The  Jewish  nation,  as  a  nation,  was  a  part  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Abraham,  had  a  national  covenant  based  upon  the  flesh, 
guarantying  only  fleshly,  temporal,  and  worldly  privileges. 
They  were,  indeed,  as  respected  the  world,  an  election  according 
to  the  flesh.  God  loved  the  fathers  and  chose  their  children,  not 
for  their  own  sake,  but  for  that  of  their  fathers:  Rom.  xi.  They 
had  a  law  written  on  tables  of  stone,  a  fallible  lawgiver,  ordi- 
nances concerning  the  flesh,  a  carnal  priesthood,  a  brazen  altar, 
animal  sacrifices,  a  worldly  sanctuary,  a  temporal  and  earthly 
inheritance,  governed  by  degenerate  kings.  Can  any  one,  then, 
consistently  affirm  that  the  Jewish  and  Christian  churches,  or, 
more  properly,  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian  church,  are, 
therefore,  one  and  the  same  religious,  spiritual,  and  moral  com- 
munity— identically  one  and  the  same  church  ?  !  If  so,  he  is 
more  infatuated  by  system  than  guided  by  reason  or  truth ;  and, 
therefore,  more  to  be  pitied  ;  or,  as  the  case  may  sometimes  be, 
more  to  be  contemned  than  reasoned  with  on  the  subject. 

III.  The  Christian  church  is  described  as  called  out  of  the 
wmM,  born  again,  regenerated,  illuminated,  justified,  sanctified, 
adopted,  saved,  a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar  people,  a  royal  priest- 
hood, a  spiritual  family,  a  royal  race — having  "  an  inheritance 
incorruptible,  uudefiled,  and  that  fadeth  not  away."  Not  so  the 
Jewish,  in  one  single  point.  Not  so  any  nation  or  people  on 
the  earth,  in  the  aggregate. 

IV.  Hence  the  Apostles,  in  calling  out  of  the  world  a  people 
for  the  Lord,  or,  what  is  the  same  thing,  in  building  a  church, 
demanded  just  as  much  from  the  Jew  as  from  the  Samaritan  or 
from  the  Greek — as  much  from  the  excellent  Cornelius  and  the 
amiable  Lydia  as  from  the  betrayers  and  murderers  of  the  Soa 
of  God.    To  the  Jew  and  to  the  Greek  they  preached  "  repent- 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  241 

ance  towards  God,  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;"  and 
thus  God  "  visited  the  nations  to  take  out  of  them  a  people  for  his 
name :"  Acts  xv.  14. 

V.  Hence,  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  is  called  a  new  body — 
a  "new  man.^'  It  has  a  "new  covenant,^'  or  constitution,  a  new 
Lawgiver,  a  new  Prophet,  a  new  King.  It  has  a  new  altar,  a 
new  sacrifice,  a  new  High-Priest.  It  has  new  ordinances,  a  new 
baptism,  a  new  supper,  and  a  new  Lord's  day.  It  was  intro- 
duced and  consummated  by  a  better  Mediator  than  Moses,  and 
is  established  upon  "better  promises." 

The  door  of  admission  into  the  Jewish  community  was  as 
wide  as  the  door  into  the  world.  No  intellectual,  moral,  or  spi- 
ritual qualification  was  required  of  any  man,  in  order  to  admis- 
sion into  it.  If  he  were  legitimately  or  illegitimately  born  of 
Jewish  blood,  or  even  bought  by  Jewish  money,  he  was  entitled 
to  its  initiatory  and  solemn  rites  and  ordinances. 

It  had,  indeed,  no  initiatory  rites  whatever,  except  for  adult 
proselytes  from  pagan  nations.  The  children  of  Jews  were  not 
circumcised  to  make  them  Jews,  but  they  were  circumcised  be- 
cause they  loere  horn  Jews.  Circumcision  only  marked  their 
flesh  and  identified  it  with  that  of  Abraham.  It  was  to  them  a 
sign,  a  proof  of  lineage  and  of  blood ;  but  indicated  neither 
moral  qualification  nor  moral  change.  AVhat  profit,  then,  had 
the  Jew  in  his  circumcision?  Its  national  advantages  were 
very  considerable ;  but  its  chief  benefit  was,  that  "  unto  them 
were  committed  the  oracles  of"  God."  They  had  the  means  of 
illumination  and  of  salvation.  But  so  have  the  nations  of  Eu- 
rope and  of  Christendom.  But  does  the  mere  possession  of  these 
oracles  secure  the  salvation  of  any  man  ?  No,  no ;  not  one. 
Still,  the  possession  of  them  is  sometimes,  and  may  often  be- 
come, the  greatest  blessing  to  those  that  hold  them,  and  not  only 
hold  them,  but  who  are  held,  and  led,  and  guided  by  them. 

But  the  advocates  for  infant  baptism  argue  the  identity  of  the 
Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian  church  for  the  sake  of  its  al- 
leged covenant  of  circumcision,  and  for  the  purpose  of  plead- 
ing their  national,  natural,  fleshly  infant  membership.  Though 
it  must  be  admitted,  that  "the  covenant  of  circumcision"  is 
neither  the  covenant  of  grace  nor  the  constitution  of  the  Jewish 
nation ;  for  circumcision  is  not  of  Moses,  but  of  Abraham  and 
the  Patriarchs ;  yet  they  seek  to  make  it  the  root  of  their  eccle- 
siastic constitption  or  church  covenant,  and  strangely  infer  the 

21 


242  SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

rite  of  Infant  baptism  from  the  bloody  rite  of  Infant  circum- 
cision. Strange,  that  the  putting  of  water  upon  an  infant  could 
doctrinally  be  the  same  with  taking  blood  from  it ;  or  the  im- 
mersing it  in  water,  identical,  in  covenant  import,  with  cutting 
off  a  portion  of  its  flesh !  That  one  and  the  same  covenant 
could  have  had  two  seals,  at  two  different  periods,  so  discordant 
and  uncongenial,  would,  methinks,  require  very  explicit  and 
very  satisfactory  proof. 

But,  still  more  revolting  to  my  mind,  that  any  covenant  rati- 
fied by  human  blood  could  be  the  same  with  that  ratified  by  the 
blood  of  the  Son  of  God !  And  is  not  the  Christian  church 
founded  upon  the  new  constitution  sealed  and  ratified  by  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  Was,  then,  the  Jewish  church,  assumed 
to  be  founded  upon  the  bloody  rite  of  circumcision,  identically 
the  same  with  the  Christian  church  founded  upon  the  blood  of 
the  slain  Lamb  of  God ! !  In  what  absurd  predicaments  do  the 
advocates  for  infant  baptism  on  the  ground  of  the  covenant  of 
circumcision,  place  themselves  before  the  world,  in  their  at- 
tempts to  sustain  the  antiquated  tradition  commended  to  them 
by  the  great  godmother  of  antichristian  innovations ! 

But  as  all  may  not  intuitively  see  the  justness  or  relevancy  of 
these  remarks,  we  shall  present  the  subject  in  a  somewhat  more 
tangible  and  intelligible  form.  We  need  only  premise  that  when 
any  one  thing  comes  in  the  room  or  place  of  another,  it  must 
occupy  the  room  or  place  of  that  thing.  Now,  as  most  Pedo- 
baptists  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  schools  afl&rm 
baptism  is  a  sort  of  spiritual  circumcision,  standing  in  the  same 
relation  to  our  church  covenant  as  did  circumcision  to  the  Jew- 
ish covenant,  we  shall  proceed  to  examine  this  hypothesis,  by  in- 
quiring in  what  particular  does  infant  baptism  fill  the  place  or 
occupy  the  room  of  circumcision. 

On  former  occasions,  we  have  found  some  sixteen  points  in 
which  these  two  institutions  do  not  fill  the  place  or  room  of  one 
another.  Indeed,  they  do  not  at  all  resemble  one  another  in  any 
one  of  these  particulars  : 

1.  Males  only  were  subjects  of  circumcision  ;  but  males  and 
females  are  subjects  of  Christian  baptism.  "  Every  male  child 
among  you  shall  be  circumcised."  The  Apostles  "  baptized  both 
men  and  women." 

2.  Circumcision  was  ordained  to  be  performed  on  the  eighth 
(lay — the  first  day   of  the  second  week   of  every  male  child. 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  243 

Does  any  party  of  Pedobaptists  occupy  the  same  day  in  dispens- 
ing the  rite  of  infant  baptism  ?     Not  one. 

3.  Adult  males  circumcised  themselves.  Do  adult  believers 
baptize  themselves  ? 

4.  Infant  males  were  circumcised  by  their  own  parents.  Do 
Christian  parents  baptize  their  own  infant  children  ? 

5.  Infant  and  adult  servants  were  circumcised  neither  on  Jlesh 
nor  faith,  but  as  property.  Does  infant  baptism  ever  occupy  this 
place  ? 

6.  Circumcision  was  not  the  door  into  the  Jewish  church.  It 
was  four  hundred  years  older  than  the  Jewish  church,  and  in- 
troduced neither  Isaac,  Ishmael,  Esau,  nor  Jacob  into  any  Jew- 
ish or  patriarchal  church.  It  never  was  to  any  Jew,  its  pecu- 
liar and  proper  subject,  an  initiatory  rite  ?  Why,  then,  call  in- 
fant baptism  an  initiatory  rite  ? 

7.  The  qualifications  for  circumcision  were  JlesJi  and  property. 
Faith  was  never  propounded,  in  any  case,  to  a  Jew,  or  his  ser- 
vants, as  a  qualification  for  circumcision.  But  do  not  Pedo- 
baptists sometimes  say — If  thou  believest  with  all  thy  heart, 
thou  mayest  ? 

8.  Infant  baptism  is  frequently  called  a  dedicatory  rite.  Be- 
lievers may  dedicate  themselves,  but  cannot  dedicate  others  to 
the  Lord  in  a  Christian  sense.  In  the  Jevdsh  sense,  however, 
the  same  persons  were  dedicated  to  the  Lord.  But  dedication 
was  never  performed  by  circumcision.  The  circumcised  were 
afterwards  dedicated  to  the  Lord :  Numbers  viii.  13-21.  Why, 
then,  make  baptism  a  dedicatory  rite  in  room  of  circumcision  ? 

9.  Circumcision,  requiring  neither  intelligence,  faith,  nor  any 
moral  qualification,  neither  did  nor  could  communicate  any 
spiritual  blessing.  No  person  ever  put  on  Christ,  or  professed 
faith  in  circumcision. 

10.  Idiots  were  circumcised  :  for  neither  intellect  nor  any  ex- 
ercise of  it  was  necessary  to  a  covenant  in  the  Jlesh.  Is  this  true 
of  baptism? 

11.  Circumcision  was  a  visible,  appreciable  mark,  as  all  signs 
are,  and  such  was  its  chief  design.  Does  baptism  fill  its  room 
in  this  respect  ? 

12.  The  duty  of  circumcision  was  not  personal,  but  parentaL 
Parents  were  bound  to  circumcise  their  children.  The  precept 
ran  thus — "  Circumcise  your  children."  But  in  baptism  it  is 
personal — "Be  baptized,  every  one  of  you." 


244  SUBJECTS   OE   BAPTISM. 

13.  The  right  of  a  child  to  circumcision,  in  no  case,  depended 
upon  the  intelligence,  faith,  piety,  or  morality  of  the  parents. 
Why,  then,  in  substituting  for  it  infant  baptism,  are  its  benefits 
to  infants  withholden  from  it,  because  of  the  ignorance,  impiety, 
or  immorality  of  its  parents  ?  Does  infant  baptism  exactly  fill 
the  place  of  circumcision  in  this  particular  ? 

14.  Circumcision  was  a  guarantee  of  certain  temporal  benefits 
to  a  Jew.  Does  baptism  guaranty  any  temporal  blessing  to  the 
subject  of  it? 

15.  It  was  not  to  be  performed  in  the  name  of  God,  nor  into 
the  name  of  any  being  in  heaven  or  earth.  Why,  then,  on  the 
plea  of  coming  in  the  room  of  circumcision,  is  any  infant  bap- 
tized in  or  into  the  name  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  ? 

16.  The  subject  of  circumcision  was  a  debtor  to  the  whole 
law.     Is  this  true  of  every  subject  of  baptism  ? 

If  these  discrepancies  do  not  fully  annul  the  pretensions  of 
baptism  as  coming  in  the  room  and  place  of  circumcision,  we 
know  not  what  discrepancies,  either  in  number  or  kind,  would 
be  sufficient  for  such- a  purpose  ! 

These  sixteen  indisputable  facts  are  truly  distinct  and  demon- 
strable attributes  and  properties  of  circumcision,  each  of  which 
differs,  and  of  course  the  aggregate  difiers  from  baptism  as  now 
administered  by  Komanists  and  Protestants'.  Had  we  deemed 
it  at  all  important,  we  could  as  easily,  in  all  the  other  al- 
leged points  of  identity  between  the  Jewish  and  Christian  insti- 
tutions, have  made  out  lists  of  specifications,  either  more  or  less 
numerous  than  the  preceding.  But  that  being  only  to  multiply 
words  to  no  profit,  I  am  content  to  annihilate  infant  church 
membership  as  founded  upon  the  identity  of  signs  and  seals.  A 
thousand  vague  generalities  are  worth  nothing — absolutely 
worth  nothing  in  a  question  of  identity.^ 

How  entirely  unfounded  and  gratuitous  the  assumption  that 
baptism  and  circumcision  are  seals  of  the  same  covenant,  or  that 
the  former  came  in  room  of  the  latter,  must  appear  evident  and 
demonstrative  to  those  who  read,  with  a  discriminating  eye,  the 
history  of  baptism  as  reported  in  the  New  Testament. 

All  the  subjects  of  John's  baptism  had  been  circumcised. 
The  Messiah  was  circumcised  the  eighth  day.f     As  the  first- 

*  See  Chapters  VI.  and  VII.  on  Circumcision— on  Flesh  and  Spirit.  Book  I. 
t  Luke  u.  21. 


SUBJECTS  OP  BAPTISM.  245 

born  of  his  mother,  he  was  on  the  fortieth  day  dedicated  to  the 
Lord  according  to  law.  He  was  baptized  in  his  thirtieth  year. 
Was  baptism,  in  his  case,  a  substitute  for  circumcision  ?  !  All 
the  males  baptized  by  the  Harbinger,  (and  we  read  of  no  females 
baptized  by  him,)  had  been  circumcised.  In  these  cases,  then, 
there  is  no  favour  shown  to  the  fond  speculations  of  Pedobaptists. 

And  who  were  the  persons  baptized  in  Pentecost,  Jerusalem, 
and  Samaria  ?  The  three  thousand  ?  The  five  thousand  ?  The 
myriads  of  Jews  that  had  been  baptized  and  were  all  zealous  of 
the  law  ?  Had  they  not  all,  to  a  man,  been  circumcised  ?  Yes, 
circumcised  and  baptized  also.  Where  now  the  phantom  of  bap- 
tism— of  infant  baptism,  a  substitute  for  infant  circumcision  ? 
Can  any  one  sensibly  and  truthfully  say  that  the  latter  is  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  former  ? 

But  one  assumption  usually  requires  the  aid  of  another.  It  is 
assumed  that  circumcision  is  done  away,  and  that  baptism  is 
come  in  room  of  it.  "Do7ie  away,"  by  what  authority  ?  It  was 
not  done  away,  so  far  down  the  Christian  age  as  New  Testament 
history  reaches.  A  *  report  had  gone  abroad  that  Paul  forbade 
the  Jews  to  circumcise  their  children.  This,  so  late  as  the  year 
sixty,  brought  Paul  into  some  trouble.  He  was,  indeed,  at  con- 
siderable expense  and  labor  in  denying  the  charge,  and  in  con- 
tradicting those  who  slandered  him  in  this  particular.* 

The  believing  Jews  continued  circumcision  till  entirely  amal- 
gamated with  the  believing  Gentiles  in  the  Christian  church. 
They  never  gave  it  up  because  of  baptism.  It  was  their  national 
badge  and  peculiarity,  and  stood  not  in  the  way  of  their  bap- 
tism and  communion  with  the  believing  Grentiles.  Those  Juda- 
izers  who  sought  to  bring  the  Gentiles  into  the  practice  of  it  were 
severely  reproved  ;  and  those  Gentiles  or  Jews  that  presumed 
to  say  that  it  must  be  added  to  Christianity,  were  informed  that 
if  they  added  circumcision  to  the  gospel,  "  they  became  debtors 
to  do  the  law,^'  and  "  that  Christ  should  profit  them  nothing." 

There  is,  then,  not  any  foundation  whatever,  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, for  the  assumed  identity  of  "  the  Jewish  and  Christian 
churches,"  or  of  the  covenants  on  which  they  are  respectively 
founded.  The  Christian  church  is  founded  upon  the  New  Cove- 
nant; Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone,  and  not 
on  the  covenant  of  circumcision.     Baptism  has  not  come  in  the 


*  Acts  xxi.  24,  25. 
21* 


246  SUBJECTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

room  of  any  thing.  It  is  a  New  Testament  ordinance  of  great 
significance  and  value  to  the  Christian  church.  It  is  a  personal 
duty  which  every  believer  owes  to  himself  and  to  the  Lord. 

The  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  its  institutions,  are  ad- 
dressed to  persons  who  can  learn,  who  can  hear,  understand, 
and  obey.  "  It  proclaims  liberty  to  the  captive,"  It  emanci- 
pates man  from  the  slavery  of  sin.  It  treats  him  as  one  who 
must  think,  and  reason,  and  learn  and  obey  for  himself.  It  in- 
spires man  with  a  spirit  of  liberty  and  mental  independence. 
"If  the  Son  shall  make  you  free,  you  shall  be  free  indeed,"  is 
one  of  the  Messiah's  own  promises. 

We  have  now,  I  hope,  satisfactorily  seen,  from  a  full  induc- 
tion of  every  case  of  baptism  reported  or  alluded  to  in  the  his- 
torical and  epistolary  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  that  there 
is  not  one  instance  of  infant  bajjtism,  exp-essed  or  implied,  from 
the  first  to  the  last  page  of  that  apostolic  and  Divine  Volume. 
There  is  neither  precept,  precedent,  nor  allusion,  directly  or  re- 
motely squinting  at  it,  in  all  the  pages  of  inspiration.  As  soon 
may  we  find  the  legends  of  purgatory,  auricular  confession, 
transubstantiation,  the  invocation  of  the  Virgin,  or  prayers  for 
the  dead,  as  find  in  that  volume  any  authority  whatever  for  in- 
fant baptism  or  infant  communion. 

No  one  need  ask.  Why,  then,  so  early  introduced  and  so  long 
in  practice,  and  why  believed  by  so  many  great,  and  learned, 
and  excellent  men  ?  Ah  me  !  what  profane  tenets,  what  fatal 
aberrations  from  the  Sacred  Scriptures  may  not  be  maintained 
and  defended  in  this  way  !  How  ancient  the  alleged  saving  vir- 
tue of  celibacy — the  fasts,  the  feasts,  the  penances,  and  works 
of  supererogation  of  Papal  superstition !  Nay,  how  many  ex- 
cellent Roman  worshippers  of  the  Virgin  Mary!  What  Fene- 
lons,  and  Rollins,  and  Pascals,  and  St.  Pierres  adorn  the  an- 
nals and  fill  the  niches  of  Papal  fame  !  If  great,  and  learned, 
and  reverend  names  can  authenticate  tradition,  silence  demurs, 
and  satisfy  weak  consciences,  there  is  not  an  error  in  Popery  nor 
an  imagination  in  the  ramblings  of  monkish  fanaticism  and  re- 
ligious bufibonery  that  may  not  be  favourably  regarded,  and 
cherished  with  a  profound  and  worshipful  respect.  But  we 
have  not  so  learned  Christ. 


BOOK  FOURTH. 
Bt^iQu  of  ^apti^m. 

CHAPTER  I. 

As  there  cannot  be  a  general  providence  without  a  special 
one,  so  there  cannot  be  a  general  design  in  the  Christian  Insti- 
tution without  a  specific  design  in  every  part  of  it.  If,  indeed, 
religion  be  a  reasonable  service,  there  must  be  a  reason  for 
every  part  of  it ;  and  that  reason,  whatever  it  may  be,  is  the 
proper  design  of  it ;  for  reason  without  design  is  inconceivable. 
Reason  and  design  are,  indeed,  inseparable;  or,  rather,  they 
are  two  names  for  the  same  thing.  Now,  as  the  whole  universe 
is  but  one  grand  system  of  designs  terminating  in  one  grand 
result,  so  the  Christian  Institution  is  one  great  system  of  means 
and  ends  terminating  in  one  grand  consummation — the  supreme 
glory  of  its  Author,  in  the  purity  and  happiness  of  his  intelli- 
gent and  moral  offspring. 

The  gospel  system  is  a  system  of  redemption — a  deliverance 
of  its  subjects  from  ignorance,  guilt,  and  bondage.  It  contem- 
plates a  new  creation — a  transformation  of  man  in  body,  soul, 
and  spirit.  It  is,  therefore,  a  great  system  of  physical,  moral, 
and  -spiritual  means  and  ends.  Hence,  its  doctrine,  its  precepts, 
and  its  promises  are  but  developments  of  a  remedial  system, 
originating  in  the  benevolence  of  God,  guided  by  his  wisdom, 
and  perfected  by  his  power. 

This  scheme  of  mercy  has  its  parts ;  and  each  of  these  parts 
has  its  own  peculiar  object.  Faith  is  not  a  substitute  for  re- 
pentance, holiness,  or  righteousness ;  but  a  means  to  these  ends. 
As  a  means,  it  is,  indeed,  indispensable  to  every  one  of  them. 
Prayer,  reading  or  hearing,  and  meditation  are  means  of  sanc- 
tification.  But  any  one  of  these,  without  the  other,  would  be 
incomplete  and  incompetent  to  the  end  proposed.  So  of  the 
positive  institutions  of  the  Christian  system.  Baptism,  the 
Lord's  day,  and  the  Holy  Supper  are  indispensable  provisions 

247 


248  DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM. 

of  remedial  mercy.  Not  one  of  them  can  be  dispensed  with  by 
any  one  who  desires  the  perfection  of  the  Christian  state  and 
of  the  Christian  character.  Eating,  drinking,  sleeping,  exer- 
cising, though  not  of  the  same  nor  of  equal  importance,  are, 
nevertheless,  all  essential  to  the  preservation  and  comfortable 
enjoyment  of  the  human  system. 

These  things  premised,  we  are  induced,  according  to  our  plan, 
to  institute  an  inquiry  into  the  use  of  Christian  baptism,  or, 
rather,  into  the  design  of  it.  It  is  a  conspicuous  and  promi- 
nent part  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  is  spoken  of  and  alluded 
to  more  than  one  hundred  times  in  the  New  Testament.  It  is 
worthy  of  a  full  examination,  and  of  the  most  respectful  con- 
sideration and  regard.  It  could  not  occupy  so  much  space  in 
so  small  a  volume,  and  yet  be  considered  as  a  matter  of  indif- 
ference, or  of  but  little  importance.  We  must,  therefore,  regard 
it  with  the  respect  and  reverence  due  to  a  very  prominent  divine 
institution. 

But  the  design  of  this  institution  has  long  been  thrown  into 
the  shade  because  of  the  wordy  and  impassioned  controversy 
about  what  the  action  is,  and  who  may  be  the  proper  subject  of 
it.  Now,  it  must  be  confessed  that,  whatever  importance  there 
may  be  in  settling  these  questions,  that  importance  is  wholly  to 
be  appreciated  by  the  design  of  the  institution.  This  is  the 
only  value  of  it.  The  question  concerning  the  value  of  any  ac- 
tion is  incomparably  superior  to  the  question,  AVhat  is  the  act 
itself?  or  to  the  questions,  AVho  may  perform  it?  or.  Upon 
whom  may  it  be  performed?  We  are,  therefore,  induced  to 
believe  that  the  question  now  before  us  is  the  all-interesting 
important  question — indeed,  the  transcendent  question  in  this 
discussion. 

The  appeal,  therefore,  must  be  made  to  the  proper  tribunal. 
It  must  be  carried  up  to  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists  of  Jcv«;u8 
Christ.  What,  then,  do  they  propose  as  the  design  of  New  Tes- 
tament baptism  ?  We  say  New  Testament  baptism,  because  we 
have  in  that  book  "  The  baptism  of  John,"  and  the  baptism 
ordained  by  Jesus  Christ.  Although  not  one,  nor  identical, 
they  may  materially  unfold  and  illustrate  each  other.  They 
both  came  from  heaven.  They  both  immersed  believing  and 
penitent  persons,  and  were  alike  indicative  of  divine  wisdom 
and  benevolence. 

The  Harbinger  was  sent  "to  prepare  a  people  for  the  Lord.'' 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  249 

He  designed  to  enlighten  and  purify  them.  Hence  he  was  both 
a  preacher  of  faith  and  reformation,  and  proclaimed  "  the  bap- 
tism of  repentance  for  the  rernission  of  si7is."  It  would,  then, 
appear  from  the  very  annunciation  of  John's  baptism,  that  its 
design  was  of  a  transcendently  important  and  interesting  cha- 
racter. 

The  form  of  expression  is  exceedingly  familiar  and  intelli- 
gible ;  and,  were  it  not  for  an  imaginary  incongruity  between 
the  means  and  the  end,  or  the  thing  done  and  the  alleged  pur- 
pose or  result,  no  one  could,  for  a  moment,  doubt  that  the  de- 
sign of  baptism  was  *'  for  the  remission  of  sins.''* 

The  form  of  expression  is  the  most  common  in  language,  and 
especially  in  the  simple  and  sacred  style  of  the  Apostles  and 
Evangelists.  From  the  few  examples  at  the  foot  of  the  page, 
any  one  may  see  with  what  little  reason  and  evidence  any  one 
can  intimate  that  the  form  of  the  expression  does  not  indicate 
the  design  of  an  action.  Indeed,  if  this  preposition  does  not 
intimate  design,  we  might  well  ask.  What  other  word  in  that 
language  could  suggest  such  an  idea  ? 

Nor  is  it  only  casually  intimated  that  New  Testament  bap- 


*  The  preposition  translated /or  in  this  connection  of  means  and  designs  is  often 
BO  translated ;  and  might  have  been  hundreds  of  times  much  better  so  translated 
in  the  common  yersion  of  the  New  Testament,  than  by  into  or  unto,  or  to. 

We  shall  give  a  few  examples,  selected  out  of  many  such  in  the  common  ver- 
sion:— 

Matt.  V.  13 :  "It  is  good /or  nothing."  "Take  no  thought  for  to-morrow :"  vi.  34. 
**Do  it /or  a  testimony  to  them  :"  viii.  4.  "  For  a  testimony  against  them :"  x.  18. 
"Shed  for  many /or  the  remission  of  sins:"  xxvi.  28.  "Told  for  a  memorial  of 
her :"  xxvi.  13.  "  Gave  them  for  the  potter's  field" — "for  the  burial  of  strangers :" 
xxvii.  7,  8. 

Do  not  these  indicate  the  design  or  the  end  for  which  a  thing  is  given  or  done  ? 
Did  not  the  Messiah  shed  his  blood  for  the  remission  of  sins  ?  Was  not  the  money 
given /or  the  potter's  field  ?    Was  it  not /or  the  burial  of  strangers? 

As  Luke  writes  "  the  Gospel"  and  "  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  we  shall  give  a  few 
examples  from  him  also: — "For  the  fall  and  arising  of  many  in  Israel."  "  Fjr  a 
sign  which  shall  be  spoken  against :"  Luke  ii.  34.  "  For,  there/ore,  [for  this  pur- 
pose,] I  am  sent:"  iv.  43.  "Take  nothing  for  your  journey  :"  ix.  3.  "Buy  meat 
for  all  this  people :"  ix.  13.  "  He  is  not  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God :"  ix.  62. 
"Goods  laid  up  for  many  years:"  xii.  19.  "It  is  not  fit  for  the  land,  or  for  the 
dunghill :"  xiv.  24.  "  Be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins  :"  Acts  ii.  38.  "Gave 
it  to  him  for  a  possession :"  vi.  5.  "  Nourished  him  for  her  own  son :"  vi.  21. 
"Came  here /or  that  intent:"  ix.  21.  "Are  come  up /or  a  memorial :"  x.  4.  "  For 
the  work  I  have  appointed  them :"  xiii.  2.  "  That  thou  shouldest  be  for  salva- 
tion :"  xiii.  47.  "  For  the  work  which  they  fulfilled  :"  xiv.  26.  These  are  but  a 
few  examples  from  Luke. 


250  DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM. 

tism  was  ordained  for  this  purpose.  It  is  the  only  purpose  for 
which  it  was  ordained ;  whether  in  the  hands  of  John  or  of  tho 
twelve  Apostles.  What  could  be  more  plain  or  intelligible  than 
Buch  forms  of  expression  as  the  following: — "John  did  baptize 
in  the  wilderness,  and  preach  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the 
remission  of  sins."  (Mark  i.  4.)  It  was  not  a  baptism,  but  the 
baptism  of  repentance.  It  was  not  for  remission  of  sins,  but 
for  the  remission  of  sins.  The  fixtures  of  language  could  not 
more  safely  secure  the  intention  of  an  institution.  It  was  not 
because  your  sins  have  been  remitted;  but  it  is  for,  or  in  order  to 
the  remission  of  sins. 

Nor  is  this  a  form  of  expression  peculiar  to  one  Evangelist. 
Luke,  as  well  as  Mark,  uses  the  same  formula: — "And  John 
came  into  all  the  country  about  Jordan,  preaching  the  baptism 
of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins."  Luke  iii.  3.  John's 
baptism  was  as  certainly  ^for  the  remission  of  sins"  as  it  was 
*H}ie  baptism  of  repentance."  The  death  of  the  Messiah,  or  the 
blood  of  the  new  covenant,  was  not  more  certainly  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  so  far  as  the  expression  goes,  than  was  the  baptism 
of  John  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Indeed,  they  are  not  merely 
similar,  but  are  identical  expressions  in  both  cases.  It  does  not, 
however,  follow  that  they  are  in  the  same  sense  "for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins."  But  that  they  are,  in  some  sense,  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  can  be  denied  by  no  man  who  either  understands 
the  language  of  the  Bible  or  the  language  of  men. 

From  the  apostolic  style,  one  might  as  reasonably  conclude 
that  Jesus  died  because  man's  sins  had  been  remitted,  or  because 
the  sin  of  the  world  had  been  taken  away,  as  that  men  are  to 
be  baptized,  or  that  John  baptized  men  ^^  because  their  sins  had 
been  remitted."  To  take  such  freedom  with  language,  with  the 
language  of  the  Bible,  would  be  to  make  the  word  of  God  of  no 
effect ;  or,  what  is  the  same  thing,  of  no  certain  interpretation : 
in  other  words,  of  no  meaning.  If  goods  are  laid  up  for  past 
years — if  men  buy  food  for  those  who  never  can  use  it — if  men 
provide  money  for  the  expenses  of  journeys  already  paid  for, — 
then  may  it  be  said  that  John  baptized  for  sins  already  remitted; 
or  that  his  baptism  was  for  those  who  were  already  cleansed 
from  their  pollutions. 

When  the  Lord  said,  "  To  this  end  was  I  born,  and  for  this 
cause  came  I  into  the  world,"  docs  he  not  intimate  that  he  had 
a  design  in  coming  into  the  world  ?     When  Stephcji  said  that 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  251 

Pharaoh  cast  out  the  children  of  the  Israelites  to  {he  end^  that 
they  might  not  live,  does  he  not  mean  that  their  destruction  was 
designed  by  their  exposure  ?  When  Stephen  again  says  (Acts 
vii.  5)  that  God  promised  Canaan  to  Abraham  "foi'  a  posses- 
sion," was  it  not  his  design  to  invest  him  with  that  inheritance? 
And  when  it  is  said  by  the  people  of  Damascus,  (Acts  ix.  21,) 
that  Saul  of  Tarsus  came  to  that  city  "for  the  intent  that  he 
might''  persecute  the  disciples ;  and  if  eis,  the  word  always 
used  when  baptism  and  remission  of  sins  are  connected,  be  the 
word  in  all  these  cases  containing  the  sense  of  "for,"  "w  order 
to,"  "to  the  intent  that,"  or  "for  the  intent,"  shall  we  hesitate  to 
allow,  that,  in  connection  with  remission  of  sins,  it  has  the 
same  meaning;  or,  that  our  translators  so  understood  it? 
Should  any  one  be  so  regardless  of  his  reputation,  he  would 
be  as  unsafe  as  unworthy  to  be  reasoned  with  on  any  question 
of  religion  or  morality,  whenever  he  stands  committed  to  its 
affirmative  or  negative. 

So  far,  then,  as  the  force  of  the  preposition  is  of  any  conse- 
quence or  value  to  show  a  connection  between  baptism  and 
remission  of  sins,  it  is  incontrovertibly  indicative  of  that  con- 
nection. But  were  it  translated  in  every  case  by  ijiio  or  untOy 
(versions  of  the  word  very  common  in  all  writings,  sacred  and 
profane,)  it  is  as  certainly,  though  not  so  obviously  to  all  minds, 
indicative  of  such  a  connection.  To  baptize  i?ito  remission,  or 
unto  remission,  intimates  that  the  subject  of  that  act  is  about 
passing  into  a  new  state ;  as  entering  into  partnership,  or  enter- 
ing into  marriage,  indicates  that  it  is  for  such  purposes  the 
action,  whatever  it  may  be,  is  performed.  "  Unto  what,  then, 
were  you  baptized?"  (Acts  xix.  3,)  is  equivalent  to  the  question, 
For  what  were  you,  then,  baptized;  or,  iiito  what  were  you, 
then,  baptized  ?  In  either  case,  the  relation  of  the  person  bap- 
tized is  changed. 

It  only  remains  in  this  part  of  our  essay  that  we  present,  in 
the  order  of  the  inspired  books,  all  the  passages  that  plainly 
import  any  connection  between  baptism  and  remission  of  sins. 
They  are  the  following : — 

1.  "John  did  baptize — and  preach  the  baptism  of  repentance 
for  the  remission  of  sins."    Mark  i.  4. 


*  Here  it  is  eig,  for,  to  the  end  that,  the  word  always  used  in  reference  to  "bap- 
ism  for  the  remission  of  sins." 


252  DESIGN   OF  BAPTISM. 

2.  "  The  people  of  Judea  and  Jerusalem  were  baptized  by  him 
in  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins."    Mark  i.  5. 

3.  "And  he  came  into  all  the  country  about  the  Jordan, 
preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins." 
Luke  iii.  3. 

4.  "Repent,  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesus,  for  the  remission  of  sins."    Acts  ii.  38. 

5.  "Arise  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  invoking 
the  name  of  the  Lord."   Acts  xxii.  16. 

These  are  oracles  as  express  and  explicit  as  any  we  can  ima- 
gine. Any  one  of  them  would  establish  the  connection  for 
which  we  plead.  For,  if  once  such  a  connection  is  clearly  esta- 
blished, it  depends  not  upon  the  repetition  of  it,  but  upon  the 
clearness  and  definiteness  of  the  expression  of  it.  This  is  inti- 
mated clearly  in  another  passage : — 

6.  "There  is  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism  J'   Eph.  iv.  5. 
Now,  if  there  be  but  one  baptism,  and  if  it  appear  that  both 

the  New  Testament  dispensations  of  baptism,  by  John  and  by 
the  Apostles,  clearly  affirm  a  connection  between  baptism  and 
remission  of  sins — must  it  not  follow  that  the  only  divinely-insti- 
tided  baptism  is  for  the  remission  of  sins. 

It  may,  however,  tend  to  the  confirmation  of  those  halting 
between  two  opinions,  to  inquire,  whether  there  be  any  other 
connection  between  baptism  and  any  thing  else  noted  in  the 
Christian  Scriptures ;  and,  if  so,  of  what  nature  and  kind  it  is? 

In  the  first  place,  then,  no  one  is  commanded  to  be  baptized 
for  any  tiling  else ;  and  no  one  is  ever  said  to  have  been  bap- 
tized ybr  any  thing  else,  than  for  the  remission  of  sins.  This  is 
a  very  important  fact,  and  worthy  of  much  reflection. 

I  know,  indeed,  it  may  be  said  that  there  are  two  or  three 
forms  of  expression  that  might  be  translated  in  such  a  way  as 
to  intimate  some  other  connection.     For  example : — 

"As  many  of  you  as  were  baptized /or  Jesus  Christ  were  bap- 
tized ybr  his  death."    Rom.  vi.  3. 

"Know  you  not  that  all  our  fathers  were  baptized  ybr  Moses — 
in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea?"    1  Cor.  x.  2. 

"For  by  one  Spirit  we  are  all  baptized /or  one  body."  1  Cor. 
xii.  13. 

"For  as  many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized /or  Jesus  Christ, 
have  been  baptized/);-  his  death." 

These  four  passages  complete  the  canon — the  whole  volume 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  253 

on  the  subject  of  the  relation  of  baptism  to  spiritual  rights, 
privileges,  and  honours.  We  have,  for  the  sake  of  uniformity, 
and  of  giving  vreight  to  all  conceivable  objections,  preferred  the 
common  version  of  these  passages. 

The  reader  will  remember,  that  in  all  these  it  is,  in  the  com- 
mon version,  ^Hnto  Christ,"  " into  his  death,"  '^into  one  hody,"  &c. 
Whether,  then,  we  read  for  or  into  one  body,  and  for  or  into  his 
death,  the  sense  is  the  same.  If  any  one  be  baptized  for  the  Lord, 
for  his  death,  or  for  his  body,  as  a  design,  as  an  end,  it  is  for  the 
sake  of  the  rights,  privileges,  and  honours  of  his  body,  or  for  the 
sake  of  the  rights,  privileges,  and  honours  accruing  from  his 
death,  his  church,  or  himself.  Of  all  these,  remission  of  sins 
is  the  leading  and  the  introductory  blessing — from  which  follow, 
as  consequences,  all  spiritual  privileges,  honours,  and  immuni- 
ties. **For,  if  you  be  Christ's,  then  you  are  Abraham's  seed, 
and  heirs  according  to  the  promise." 

Evident,  then,  it  is,  that  there  is  no  specific  design  on  account 
of  which  any  one  can  constitutionally  be  baptized,  except  it  be 
for  the  remission  of  sins  previously  committed.  We  are  not 
commanded  to  be  baptized  for  faith,  for  repentance,  for  justifi- 
cation, for  regeneration,  for  sanctification,  for  adoption,  for  the 
Holy  Spirit,  for  eternal  life.  We  are  commanded  to  be  baptized 
"/or  the  remission  of  shis"  not  for  the  remission  of  ''original 
sin" — not  for  the  remission  of  sins  yet  to  be  committed  or  in 
advance  ;  but  for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past,  that  have 
been  committed,  "through  the  forbearance  of  God." 

True,  when  immersed  into  Christ,  we  have  "put  on  Christ;" 
and,  of  course,  are  in  him  and  under  him,  interested  in  all  the 
provisions  of  that  covenant  of  life  and  salvation  of  which  he  is 
the  Alpha  and  the  Omega,  the  Author  and  the  Mediator.  Still, 
through  faith  and  repentance,  we  are  commanded  to  be  baptized 
for  one  specific  purpose,  just  as  much  as  we  celebrate  the  Lord's 
day  and  the  Lord's  supper  for  a  specific  purpose.  Every  Chris- 
tian institution  has,  indeed,  its  own  peculiar  and  specific  object, 
which  can  be  neither  secured  nor  enjoyed  so  well  any  other  way. 

Having,  then,  philologically  ascertained  that,  in  the  sacred 
writings  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists  of  our  King,  the  bap- 
tisms of  the  New  Testament  were  all  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
for  no  other  specific  purpose ;  our  second  leading  inquiry  must 
be.  In  what  sense  is  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins  ^  The  connec- 
tion between  baptism  and  remission  being  now  fully  ascertained 

22 


254  DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM. 

and  established,  the  nature  of  that  connection  comes  deservedly 
under  our  immediate  examination. 

The  relations  of  time  in  which  one  thing  may  stand  to  an- 
other, are  antecedent,  simultaneous,  and  consequent.  But  the 
question  is  not  about  their  relations  as  respects  mere  time, 
place,  or  circumstance ;  but  as  respects  natural  or  necessary 
dependence — such  as  that  of  cause  and  eflfect.  We  contemplate 
the  relations  of  persons  and  things  with  regard  to  the  causes  of 
their  existence  or  the  various  influences  which  they  may  exert 
on  one  another.  When  a  man's  salvation,  for  example,  is  some- 
times ascribed  to  faith,  to  repentance,  to  baptism,  to  the  grace 
of  God,  to  the  blood  of  Christ,  to  his  own  efforts,  we  are  desirous 
.to  know  why  a  man's  salvation  should  be  assigned  to  so  many 
causes.  To  prevent  confusion,  or  to  relieve  the  mind  from  a 
perplexed,  indistinct,  and  imperfect  conception  of  the  influences 
of  numerous  and  various  causes,  affecting  the  existence  of  any 
thing,  either  as  respects  itself  or  our  conceptions  of  it,  we  have 
given  to  the  word  cause  a  very  comprehensive  meaning,  and 
have  been  obliged  to  select  names  to  express  the  various  appli- 
cations of  the  word.  Thus,  we  have  a  moving  or  original  cause, 
an  efficient  or  meritorious  cause,  an  instrumental  cause,  a  concur- 
rent cause,  ajinal  cause.* 

Every  theory  of  redemption  and  salvation,  with  more  or  less 
clearness  of  perception  and  precision  of  expression,  admits  the 
necessity  of  such  distinctions  as  these.  Since  the  days  of  St. 
Augustine,  Calvin,  and  Luther,  since  the  Jansenists  and  their 
rival  orders  of  monkery,  all  writers  and  reasoners  on  this  sub- 
ject, have  been  constrained  to  admit  of  a  system  of  causes  co- 
operating in  man's  salvation. 

The  kingdoms  of  nature, — mineral,  vegetable,  and  animal, — 
are  replete  with  such  combinations  of  concurring  causes  in  the 
various  results  of  the  divine  wisdom,  power  and  goodness. 
There  is  not  any  thing  in  the  universe  of  created  things,  that  is 
the  result  of  a  single  cause,  as  to  its  being,  its  continued  being, 
or  to  its  well-being.  Indeed,  the  different  attributes  of  God 
himself  are  so  many  concurrent  causes  in  our  conceptions  of 
things,  both  material  and  mental.  Portions  of  nature,  celestial 
and  terrestrial,  are  to  be  ascribed  to  his  wisdom,  his  knowledge, 


*  See,  in  Book  v.,  the  article  on  Justification. 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  255 

his  power,  his  goodness ;  and  every  single  result  has  in  it  the 
concurrence  of  all  these. 

But,  to  keep  distinctly  before  our  minds  the  design  and  place 
of  Christian  baptism — (for  we  must  observe,  that  for  most 
minds,  it  is  enough  to  read  the  precept,  ^^  Repent  and  he  baptized, 
every  one  of  you,  for  the  remission  of  sins,"  without  presuming 
to  comprehend  or  develop  the  necessity  of  it) — two  facts  are 
most  obvious : — First,  that  all  men  alike  need  the  Christian  in- 
stitution ;  second,  that,  whatever  any  one  institution  is  to  any 
one  proper  subject  of  it,  it  is  in  some  degree  the  same  to  every 
other  proper  subject  of  it.  Therefore,  we  all  need  every  divine 
institution. 

Philosophers  are  generally  more  curious  and  inquisitive  than 
wise.  They  delight  to  comprehend  every  thing,  or  to  assume  to 
understand  all  mysteries.  But  who  can  specify,  enumerate,  and 
sort  up  the  causes  that  convert  one  grain  of  corn  into  the  flesh, 
blood,  bones,  and  covering  of  a  man,  a  horse,  or  any  other  ani- 
mal that  lives  upon  it  ?  Or  can  set  forth  the  number,  the  variety, 
and  the  order  of  the  causes  that  are  necessary  to  animal  life, 
health,  and  comfort?  If  not,  then  why  so  dogmatical  and  prag- 
matical— so  inquisitive  and  positive — so  dictatorial  and  absolute 
in  matters  solely  depending  upon  the  positive  will  and  law  of 
God? 

To  conclude  our  remarks  on  this  part  of  the  subject,  we  must 
assign  to  every  institution  of  Heaven  its  own  proper  place,  whe- 
ther in  nature,  in  providence,  or  in  redemption.  We  must  give 
to  grace,  to  faith,  to  repentance,  to  baptism,  to  the  purpose  of 
the  Father,  to  the  hlood  of  the  Son,  to  the  sanctif  cation  of  tlie 
Holy  Spirit — to  each  of  these  severally  its  proper  place  and  im- 
portance in  redemption  and  salvation ;  and  to  all  of  them  a 
concurrent  efficacy  in  the  rescue  and  delivery  of  man  from  sin, 
misery,  and  ruin. 

While,  then,  we  must  say  with  Peter,  "Baptism  doth  also  now 
save  us,''  we  will  also  say  with  Paul,  that  "we  are  saved  by 
grace,"  "justified  by  faith,''  "redeemed  by  the  blood  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,"  "sanctified  by  the  Spirit  of  our  God,"  and  with  James, 
that  "  a  man  is  justified  by  works,  and  not  by  faith  only." 

We  do  not,  however,  place  baptism  among  good  works.  Good 
works  have  our  brethren,  and  neither  God  nor  ourselves,  for 
their  object.  They  directly  and  immediately  terminate  upon 
man;  while,  in  their  reflex  influence,  they  glorify  God,  and 


256  DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM. 

Ibeatify  ourselves.  In  baptism,  we  are  in  spirit,  as  well  as  in 
person,  buried  with  the  Lord,  "wherein  also  we  are  raised  with 
him."  Dead  men  neither  bury  themselves  nor  raise  themselves 
to  life  again.  In  baptism,  we  are  passive  in  every  thing  but  in 
giving  our  consent.  We  are  buried  and  we  are  raised  by  an- 
other. Hence,  in  no  view  of  baptism  can  it  be  called  a  good 
work.  The  influence  which  baptism  may  have  upon  our  spi- 
ritual relations  is,  therefore,  not  because  of  any  merit  in  the 
act  as  our  own ;  not  as  a  procuring  cause,  but  merely  as  an  in- 
strumental and  concurring  cause,  by  which  we  "put  on  Christ," 
and  are  united  to  him  formally  as  well  as  in  heart,  entering 
into  covenant  with  him,  and  uniting  ourselves  to  him  in  his 
death,  burial,  and  resurrection.  Hence,  said  the  Apostle,  "As 
many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ  have  been  bap- 
tized into  his  death" — "have  put  on  Christ." 

While,  then,  baptism  is  ordained  for  remission  of  sins,  and 
for  no  other  specific  purpose,  it  is  not  as  a  procuring  cause,  as  a 
meritorious  or  efficient  cause,  but  as  an  instrumental  cause,  in 
which  faith  and  repentance  are  developed  and  made  fruitful 
and  effectual  in  the  changing  of  our  state  and  spiritual  relations 
to  the  Divine  Persons  whose  names  are  put  upon  us  in  the  very 
act. 

It  is  also  a  solemn  pledge  and  a  formal  assurance  on  the  part 
of  our  Father,  that  he  has  forgiven  all  our  offences — a  positive, 
sensible,  solemn  seal  and  pledge  that,  through  faith  in  the  blood 
of  the  slain  Lamb  of  God,  and  through  repentance,  or  a  heart- 
felt sorrow  for  the  past,  and  a  firm  purpose  of  reformation  of 
life,  by  the  virtues  of  the  great  Mediator,  we  are  thus  publicly 
declared  forgiven,  and  formally  obtain  the  assurance  of  our  ac- 
ceptance and  pardon,  with  the  promised  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  strengthen  and  furnish  us  for  every  good  thought,  and  Avord, 
and  work. 

Some  have  such  a  puerile  and  inadequate  conception  of  Chris- 
tian baptism,  as  to  regard  it  as  a  mere  ceremonial  introduction 
into  the  church — a  way  of  making  a  profession  of  the  Christian 
religion — no  way  affecting  the  spiritual  relations  of  the  sub- 
ject. This  view  of  it  ought  to  have  been  expressed  by  such  a 
precept  as  the  following: — "Repent  and  be  baptized,  every  one 
of  you,  for  admission  into  the  church."  But  no  such  precept, 
in  form,  in  substance,  or  in  sense,  is  found  in  God's  own  book. 
As  we  have,  then,  but  one  Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism,  and 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  257 

that  baptism  is  "for  the  remission  of  sins" — to  give  us,  through 
faith  and  repentance,  a  solemn  pledge  and  assurance  of  pardon, 
any  other  baptism  is  a  human  invention  and  of  no  value ;  want- 
ing, as  it  does,  the  sanction  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  who  ordained  it, 
and  submitted  to  the  baptism  of  John  as  an  example  to  others 
to  honour  and  obey  every  divine  institution.  But  there  are 
other  passages  of  Sacred  Scripture  that  both  illustrate  and  con- 
firm the  views  now  presented. 

It  is  a  very  important  and  interesting  fact,  that  no  great  doc- 
trine or  institution  of  Christianity  wholly  depends  upon  a  single 
passage,  or  even  upon  a  mere  plurality  of  passages.  Such  is 
not  the  Lord's  way  of  teaching  his  will  to  weak  and  erring  mor- 
tals. He  gives  us  line  upon  line,  precept  upon  precept,  here  a 
little  and  there  a  little  ;  wisdom  for  the  wise,  knowledge  for  the 
prudent,  and  information  for  all.  No  great  doctrine,  no  im- 
portant principle,  no  solemn,  moral,  or  religious  duty  ever  was 
confined  to  a  single  enunciation.  The  more  important  the  duty 
or  the  more  valuable  the  privilege,  the  more  ample,  explicit, 
and  frequent  the  allusion  to  it,  except  in  cases  so  plain  and  of 
such  easy  intelligence  and  comprehension  that  he  may  run  that 
reads  it. 

Baptism,  a  new  institution,  is  an  ordination  of  great  signifi- 
cance, and  of  the  most  solemn  and  sublime  importance.  It  is 
a  sort  of  embodiment  of  the  gospel ;  and  a  solemn  expression 
of  it  all  in  a  single  act.  Hence  the  space  and  the  place  assigned 
it  in  the  commission.  It  is  a  monumental  and  commemorative 
institution,  bodying  forth  to  all  ages  the  great  facts  of  man's 
redemption  as  developed  and  consummated  in  the  death,  burial, 
and  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Hence,  immediately 
upon  the  first  constitutional  promulgation  of  it  on  the  part  of 
the  Christian  Lawgiver  and  Saviour,  he  adds,  "-He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved.'' 

This  has  in  all  past  time,  and  will  in  all  future  time  impart 
to  this  institution  a  solemnity,  a  significance,  and  an  importance 
which  no  art  or  ingenuity  of  corrupted  Christianity  can  long 
obscure  or  successfully  deface.  It  will  give  to  it  an  authority 
and  a  claim  upon  the  understanding,  the  conscience,  and  the 
afi"ections  of  the  humble  and  the  devout,  which  no  sophistry  or 
hardihood  can  weaken  or  destroy.  To  associate  faith  and  iDap- 
tism  as  antecedents,  whose  consequent  is  salvation,  no  matter 
what  the  connection  may  be,  will  always  impart  to  the  institu- 

22* 


258  DESIGN   OP  BAPTISM. 

tion  a  pre-eminence  above  all  other  religious  institutions  in  the 
world.  The  Lord  does  not  say,  he  that  believeth  and  obeys  this 
or  that  moral  precept  shall  be  saved;  but  "He  that  believeth 
the  gospel  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved."  This  very  intelli- 
gible and  prominent  annunciation,  just  before  his  ascension, 
greatly  explains  and  justifies  the  new  precept  promulged  by 
Peter,  a  few  days  afterwards,  when  the  ascended  Lord  had  sent 
down  his  Holy  Spirit  to  advocate  his  cause.  Peter,  after  the 
new  light  imparted  in  the  commission,  feared  not  to  say  to  the 
inquiring  Jews,  "  Repent  and  he  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  for  the  remission  of  sins."  Nor  did  any 
one,  so  far  as  the  history  of  the  apostolic  labors  is  reported,  ever 
express  a  doubt  or  an  inquiry  upon  the  connection  thus  solemnly 
established  between  faith,  repentance,  baptism,  and  remission 
or  salvation.  So  far  from  this,  that  the  Apostles  frequently 
allude  to  the  subject  in  their  epistles  as  though,  by  universal 
consent,  it  was  understood  to  be  a  symbol  of  moral  purification — 
a  washing  away  of  sin  in  a  figure,  declarative  of  a  true  and  real 
remission  of  sin — a  formal  and  definite  release  of  the  conscience 
from  the  feeling  of  guilt  and  all  its  condemnatory  power. 

There  remains,  in  the  historical  books  of  the  New  Institution, 
another  very  striking  evidence  of  the  proper  design  of  Christian 
baptism.  It  being  a  change  of  the  verbiage  of  Peter,  and  from 
another  speaker,  and  addressed  to  a  great  sinner,  it  is  peculi- 
arly striking  and  impressive.  It  is  the  address  of  Ananias  to 
Saul  of  Tarsus,  than  whom  had  not  then  lived  a  more  fierce 
and  hostile  spirit  opposed  to  the  claims  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 
When  commanded  to  wait  for  a  message  from  the  Lord,  Ana- 
nias waited  upon  him ;  and,  after  a  very  short  introduction,  he 
said  to  Saul  of  Tarsus,  "  Arise,  brother  Saul,  and  be  baptized, 
and  wash  away  thy  sins,  invoking  the  name  of  the  Lord."  A 
most  unguarded  and  unjustifiable  form  of  address,  under  the 
sanction  of  a  divine  mission,  if  baptism  had  not  for  its  design 
the  formal  and  definite  remission  of  sins,  according  to  the  Pen- 
tecostian  address. 

From  the  express  authority  and  evidence  of  Apostles  and 
Evangelists,  without  any  inferential  reasoning,  we  feel  con- 
strained to  conclude  that  the  baptisms  of  this  New  Testament, 
both  of  John  and  Jesus,  were  for  the  true,  real,  and  formal  re- 
mission of  sins,  through  faith  in  the  Messiah,  and  a  genuine 
repentance  towards  God.     Wc  shall,  however,  for  the  sake  of 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  259 

some  of  our  readers  who  are  slow  to  believe  all  that  the  Apos- 
tles have  spoken,  devote  to  the  subject  another  essay,  in  the 
further  examination  of  the  sacred  writings,  and  in  some  notices 
of  the  traditions  of  the  fathers. 


CHAPTER  II. 

DESIGN   OF   BAPTISM. 


Every  divine  institution  has  its  own  specific  design.  They 
all,  indeed,  have  one  grand,  general  design ; — the  glory  of  God, 
and  the  happiness  of  man.  But,  as  neither  the  glory  of  God 
nor  the  happiness  of  man  consists  in  one  item,  or  in  one  mani- 
festation, his  precepts  and  our  acts  of  obedience  are  necessa- 
rily both  numerous  and  various.  Nature  and  religion  being  the 
ofispring  of  the  same  supremely  wise  and  benevolent  mind,  may 
be  supposed  to  carry  in  them  conclusive  evidence  of  the  same 
divine  original.  Hence,  the  numerous  and  various  parables 
and  allusions  to  nature  on  the  part  of  the  great  Teacher,  while 
developing  that  gracious  institution,  of  which  he  is  the  begin- 
ning, middle,  and  end. 

Now  as,  in  nature,  no  one  ordinance  or  institution  can  be- 
come a  substitute  for  another,  so,  in  Christianity,  no  one  ordi- 
nance can  either  be  dispensed  with  or  substituted  for  another, 
but  at  the  detriment  and  loss  of  the  subject.  There  is  a  specific 
virtue  in  every  ordinance  of  religion,  as  in  every  ordinance  of 
nature.  There  is  no  substitute  for  air,  light,  heat,  or  moisture, 
in  either  the  vegetable  or  animal  kingdom ;  and  there  is  no  sub- 
stitute for  faith,  repentance,  and  baptism,  in  the  present  dispen- 
sation of  grace.  It  is  not  for  us  to  ask,  nor  is  it  due  to  us  from 
God  to  give,  the  reason  why.  He  ordains  and  commands  bless- 
ings to  be  bestowed  in  his  own  way ;  and  it  is  alike  our  duty  and 
our  happiness  implicitly  to  obey  and  enjoy  them.  We  have  only 
to  ascertain  the  fact  that  God  has  so  commanded,  and  our  duty 
then  is  to  obey. 

All  the  ordinances  of  Christianity  are  means  of  grace.  Faith, 
repentance,  baptism,  the  Lord's  day,  the  Lord's  supper,  the 
church  and  its  ministry,  are  all  means  of  grace.  There  are, 
indeed,  many  graces  requisite  to  the  completion  and  perfection 
of  Christian  character.     There  is  the  grace  of  faith — the  grace 


260  DESiaN  OP  BAPTISM. 

of  repentance — the  grace  of  forgiveness — the  grace  of  justi- 
fication— the  grace  of  sanctification — the  grace  of  adoption — 
the  grace  of  assurance — the  grace  of  perfection — the  grace  of 
happiness.  There  are  means  of  each  and  of  all  of  these  graces. 
Is  there  the  grace  of  faith  ?  There  are  the  means  of  faith ; — 
the  well-attested  testimony  of  God.  Is  there  the  grace  of  re- 
pentance ?  There  are  the  arguments  drawn  from  our  guilt  and 
God's  infinite  mercy.  Is  there  the  grace  of  forgiveness  ?  There 
are  the  blood  of  Christ,  the  love  of  God,  and  the  promises  ad- 
dressed to  our  faith.  Is  there  the  assurance  of  pardon  ?  There 
is  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  and,  as  a  consequence,  the 
love  of  God  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Is 
there  the  grace  of  justification?  There  are  the  death  of  Christ, 
faith  in  it,  repentance,  and  a  baptism  into  his  death.  Is 
there  the  grace  of  adoption  ?  There  is  the  Spirit  of  God  bear- 
ing witness  with  our  spirit  that  we  are  the  sons  of  God.  Is 
there  the  grace  of  perfection?  There  are  the  precepts,  the 
example  of  Christ,  the  Lord's  day,  the  Lord's  supper,  the  fel- 
lowship and  prayers  of  kindred  spirits,  and  the  obedience  of 
faith.  Is  there  the  grace  of  happiness  ?  Then  there  are  the 
love  of  God  shed  abroad  in  the  heart,  the  favour  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost — a  pledge 
and  an  earnest  of  the  eternal  rest. 

But  we  have  now  before  us  the  special  design  of  baptism,  as 
the  assurance  of  remission ;  a  pledge  of  pardon,  of  our  burial 
with  Christ,  and  our  resurrection  to  a  new  life.  This  is  "  bap- 
tism for  the  remission  of  sins."  That  baptism  was  designed 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  for  a  pledge  and  an  assurance  of  par- 
don, through  the  Messiah,  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
•we  shall  now  first  proceed  to  prove. 

1.  Testimony  of  the  Harbinger  himself:  "In  those  days 
came  John  the  Baptist ;  the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilder- 
ness. Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord!  Make  his  paths  straight. 
John  did  baptize  in  the  wilderness,  and  preach  the  baptism  of 
repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins."  .  Mark,  the  Evangelist, 
chap.  i.  2,  3,  4. 

2.  Luke  also  affirms,  chap.  iii.  3:  "And  he  came  into  all  the 
country  about  the  Jordan  preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance 
for  the  remission  of  sir^s." 

3.  Peter,  to  whom  the  keys  of  the  approaching  Reign  of 
Heaven  were  committed  by  the  Lord  in  person,  in  opening  tho 


DESIGN   OP  BAPTISM.  261 

gospel  kingdom,  when  first  asked  by  penitent  believers  what 
they  should  do  in  order  to  remission,  answers — "  Repent,'^  or 
reform,  "and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  for  the  remission  of  sins."  Acts  ii.  37. 

4.  This  connection  between  faith  and  baptism  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  nay,  for  salvation  itself,  was,  indeed,  first  announced 
by  the  Lord  in  person,  in  giving  the  commission  after  his  resur- 
rection— "Preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.'^  "  He  that  be- 
lieveth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved."  Mark  xvi.  16. 

5.  Ananias,  sent  specially  to  Saul  of  Tarsus  by  the  Lord, 
preaches  after  the  same  manner,  when  he  says.  Acts  xxii.  16, 
"  Arise,  brother  Saul,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  your  sins, 
calling  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

6.  Cornelius,  the  centurion,  on  hearing  Peter,  was  hearing 
words  by  which  an  angel  told  him,  "he  and  his  family  should 
be  saved."  And  when  these  words  were  announced,  Peter  com- 
manded him  and  all  present  forthwith  to  be  baptized.   Acts  x. 

■   7.  We  shall  hear  Luther,  the  great  Reformer: — 

"  This  is  not  done  by  changing  of  a  garment,  or  by  any  laws 
or  works,  but  by  a  new  birth,  and  by  the  renewing  of  the  in- 
ward man,  which  is  done  in  baptism,  as  Paul  saith,  '  All  ye 
that  are  baptized  have  put  on  Christ.^  Also,  *  According  to  his 
mercy  he  saved  us  by  the  washing  of  regeneration,  and  renew- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost.''  Tit.  iii.  5.  For  besides  that  they  who 
are  baptized  are  regenerated  and  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
a  heavenly  righteousness  and  to  eternal  life,  there  riseth  in  them 
also  a  new  light  and  a  new  flame  ;  there  riseth  in  them  new  and 
holy  affections,  as  the  fear  of  God,  true  faith,  and  assured  hopes, 
&c.  There  beginneth  in  them  also  a  new  will,  and  this  is  to  put 
on  Christ  truly  and  according  to  the  gospel. 

"  Therefore,  the  righteousness  of  the  law,  or  of  our  own  works, 
is  not  given  unto  us  in  baptism  ;  but  Christ  himself  is  our  gar- 
ment. Now  Christ  is  no  law,  no  lawgiver,  no  works,  but  a  di- 
vine and  an  inestimable  gift,  whom  God  hath  given  unto  us, 
that  he  might  be  our  justifier,  our  Saviour,  and  our  Redeemer. 
Wherefore  to  be  appareled  with  Christ  according  to  the  gospel, 
is  not  to  be  appareled  with  the  law  or  with  works,  but,  with  an 
incomparable  gift ;  that  is,  with  remission  of  sins,  righteousness, 
peace,  consolation,  joy  of  spirit,  salvation,  life,  and  Christ  him- 
self." Luther  on  Galatians:  Phila.  1801,  8vo.  p.  302. 

8.  We  shall  next  hear  Calvin  : — 

"  From  baptism  our  faith  derives  three  advantages,  which  re- 
quire to  be  distinctly  considered.  The  first  is,  that  it  is  proposed 
to  us  by  the  Lord  as  a  symbol  and  token  of  our  purification ;  or, 


262  DESIGN  OF   BAPTISM. 

to  express  my  meaning  more  fully,  it  resembles  a  legal  instru- 
ment properly  attested,  by  which  he  assures  us  that  all  our  sins 
are  cancelled,  effaced,  and  obliterated,  so  that  they  %Yill  never 
appear  in  his  sight,  or  come  into  his  remembrance,  or  be  im- 
puted to  us.  For  lie  commands  all  who  believe,  to  he  baptized  for 
the  remission  of  their  sins.  Therefore,  those  who  have  imagined 
that  baptism  is  nothing  more  than  a  mark  or  sign  by  which  we 
profess  our  religion  before  men,  as  soldiers  wear  the  insignia  of 
their  sovereign  as  a  mark  of  their  profession,  have  not  consi- 
dered that  which  was  the  principal  thing  in  baptism  ;  which  is, 
that  we  ought  to  receive  it  with  this  promise,  *  He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved/  Mark  xvi.  16. 

"  2.  In  this  sense  we  are  to  understand  what  is  said  by  Paul, 
that  Christ  sanctitieth  and  cleanseth  the  church  'with  the  wash- 
ing of  the  water  by  the  word,^  Ephes.  v.  26  ;  and,  in  another 
place,  that  '  according  to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by  the  washing 
of  regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,'  Tit.  iii.  5  ; 
and  by  Peter,  that  '  baptism  doth  save  us,'  1  Pet.  iii.  21.  For 
it  was  not  the  intention  of  Paul  to  signify  that  our  ablution  and 
salvation  are  completed  by  the  water,  or  that  water  contains  in 
itself  the  virtue  to  purify,  regenerate,  and  renew  ;  nor  did  Peter 
mean  that  it  was  the  cause  of  salvation,  but  only  that  the  know- 
ledge and  assurance  of  it  is  received  in  this  sacrament :  which 
is  sufficiently  evident  from  the  words  they  have  used.  For  Paul 
connects  together  the  *  word  of  life'  and  '  the  baptism  of  water  ;' 
as  if  he  had  said,  that  our  ablution  and  sanctification  are  an- 
nounced to  us  by  the  gospel,  and  by  baptism  this  message  is 
confirmed.  And  Peter,  after  having  said  that  *  baptism  doth 
save  us,'  immediately  adds,  that  it  is  '  not  the  putting  away  the 
filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God,' 
which  proceeds  from  faith.  But  on  the  contrary,  baptism  pro- 
mises us  no  other  purification  than  by  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  Christ ;  which  is  emblematically  represented  by  water,  on  ac- 
count of  its  resemblance  to  washing  and  cleansing.  Who,  then, 
can  pretend  that  we  are  cleansed  by  that  water,  which  clearly 
testifies  the  blood  of  Christ  to  be  our  true  and  only  ablution  ? 
So  that,  to  refute  the  error  of  those  who  refer  all  to  the  virtue  of 
the  water,  no  better  argument  could  be  found,  than  in  the  signi- 
fication of  baptism  itself,  which  abstracts  us  as  well  from  that 
visible  element,  which  is  placed  before  our  eyes,  as  from  all 
other  means  of  salvation,  that  it  may  fix  our  minds  on  Christ 
alone. 

"  3.  Nor  must  it  be  supposed  that  baptism  is  administered 
only  for  the  time  past,  so  that  for  sins  into  Avhich  we  fall  after 
baptism,  it  would  be  necessary  to  sock  other  new  remedies  of 
expiation,  in  I  know  not  what  other  sacraments,  as  if  the  virtue 
of  baptism  were  become  obsolete.  In  consequence  of  this  error, 
it  happened  in  former  ages,  that  some  persons  would  not  be  bap- 


DESIGN   OP  BAPTISM.  263 

tlzed  except  at  the  close  of  their  life,  and  almost  in  the  moment 
of  their  death,  so  that  they  might  obtain  pardon  for  their  whole 
life  ;  a  preposterous  caution,  which  is  frequently  censured  in  the 
writings  of  the  ancient  bishops.  But  we  ought  to  conclude,  that 
at  whatever  time  we  are  baptized,  we  are  washed  and  purified 
for  the  whole  of  life.  Whenever  we  have  fallen,  therefore,  we 
must  recur  to  the  remembrance  of  baptism,  and  arm  our  minds 
with  the  consideration  of  it,  that  we  may  be  always  certified  and 
assured  of  the  remission  of  our  sins.  For  though,  when  it  has 
been  once  administered,  it  appears  to  be  past,  yet  it  is  not  abo- 
lished by  subsequent  sins.  For  the  purity  of  Christ  is  ofi'ered  to 
us  in  it ;  and  that  always  retains  its  virtue,  is  never  overcome 
by  any  blemishes,  but  purifies  and  obliterates  all  our  defile- 
ments.'^ 

9.  Timothy  Dwight,  President  of  Yale,  says  :— 

"To  be  born  of  water  here  means  baptism,  and  in  my  view  it 
is  as  necessary  to  our  admission  into  the  visible  church,  as  to  be 
born  of  the  Spirit  is  to  our  admission  into  the  invisible  kingdom.^' 
"It  is  to  be  observed,  that  he  who  understands  the  authority  of 
this  institution,  and  refuses  to  obey  it,  will  never  enter  into 
either  the  visible  or  the  invisible  kingdom.^' 

10.  Dr.  Thomas  Scott,  author  of  the  Commentary,  says  : — 

"  'Men  and  hretliren,  ivJiat  shall  we  do  P — To  this  the  Apostle 
replied,  by  exhorting  them  to  repent  of  all  their  sins,  and  openly 
to  avow  their  firm  belief  that  Jesus  was  indeed  the  Messiah,  hy 
teing  baptized  in  his  name.  In  thus  professing  their  faith  in  him, 
all  who  truly  believed  would  receive  a  full  remission  of  their 
sins  for  his  sake,  as  well  as  a  participation  of  the  sanctifying 
and  comforting  graces  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Scott's  Commentary 
on  Acts  ii.  38. 

11.  Witsius  (on  the  Economy  of  the  Covenants,  London,  1837, 
2  vols.^p.  429)  says  : — 

"Thus  far  concerning  the  rites  of  immersion  and  emersion. 
Let  us  now  consider  the  ablution  or  washing,  which  is  the  effect 
of  the  water  applied  to  the  body.  In  external  baptism  there  is 
'  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,'  1  Peter  iii.  21,  which 
represents  the  ablution  or  washing  away  the  filth  of  the  soul 
contracted  by  sin.  Acts  xxii.  16,  '  Arise  and  be  baptized,  and 
wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord.'  But  the 
filth  of  sin  may  be  considered  either  with  respect  to  the  guilt, 
which  is  annexed  to  the  filth  or  stain,  and  so  it  is  removed  by 
remission,  which  is  a  part  of  justification;  or  with  respect  to 
the  stain  itself,  or  spiritual  deformity  and  dissimilitude  to  the 
image  of  God,  and  so  it  is  taken  away  by  the  grace  of  the  sanc- 
tifying Spirit ;  and  both  are  sealed  by  baptism.  Of  the  former, 
Peter  speaks,  Acts  ii.  38,  *Be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the 


264  DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM. 

name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins/  Concerning  the 
latter,  Paul  writes,  Ephes.  v.  25,  26,  *  Christ  loved  the  church, 
and  gave  himself  for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it 
with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  word/  And  they  are  laid 
before  us  both  together,  1  Cor.  vi.  11,  *  But  ye  are  washed,  but 
ye  are  sanctified,  but  ye  are  justified,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  and  by  the  Spirit  of  our  God/  " 

So  speaks  one  of  the  most  learned  and  influential  of  the  great 
continental  doctors,  in  his  work  on  the  Economy  of  the  Cove- 
nants, 

12.  Rev.  James  McCord,  one  of  the  most  popular  and  learned 
Presbyterian  ministers  of  Kentucky,  of  the  present  century, 
said  some  years  ago  : — 

"You  will  not,  therefore,  deem  it  an  unreasonable  statement, 
that  there  is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation  without  the 
precincts  of  the  Christian  church,  if  once  we  can  clearly  make 
it  out  to  you  that  the  church  is  the  great  mean  of  eifecting 
man's  salvation. 

''This  is  not  one  of  those  questions  that  are  only  to  be  settled 
by  long  and  difficult  argument.  It  is  a  question  of  fact ;  and 
you  will  find  the  decision  written,  as  with  a  sunbeam,  in  every 
page  of  Scripture.  When  the  Saviour  gave  commandment  to 
his  Apostles  to  proclaim  his  great  salvation  to  all  people  under 
heaven,  what  was  the  declaration  that  accompanied  this  com- 
mandment ?  '  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved/ 
When  those  Apostles  made  the  first  proof  of  their  ministry,  in 
the  city  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  memorable  day  of  Pentecost,  what 
was  their  answer  to  the  agonized  multitudes  who  felt  convicted 
of  the  sin  of  crucifying  God's  own  Messiah,  and  cried  out  in 
horror,  '  Men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do  V  '  llepent  and 
be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.'  This  was  their  answer  to  the  eager  inquiry.  When  the 
Apostles  went  abroad  among  the  Gentile  nations,  what  other 
prescription  did  they  ever  give  for  attaining  to  God's  salvation? 
'Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ/  'believe  and  be  baptized  / 
*  the  word  is  nigh  thee,  even  in  thy  mouth  and  in  thy  heart — 
that  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,  and 
ehalt  believe  in  thy  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the 
dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.  For,  with  the  heart  man  believeth 
unto  righteousness ;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made 
unto  salvation.' "     Last  Appeal,  p.  165,  166. 

13.  And  that  this  is  all  consistent  with  certain  declarations 
of  the  Westminster  Catechism  and  Confession  of  Faith,  the  fol- 
lowing extracts  show : — 


DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM.  265 

"  Q.  165.  What  is  baptism? 

*'^.  Baptism  is  a  sacrament  of  the  New  Testament,  wherein 
Christ  hath  ordained  the  washing  with  water  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  be  a  sign  and 
seal  of  ingrafting  into  himself;  of  remission  of  sins  by  his  blood, 
and  regeneration  by  his  Spirit ;  of  adoption,  and  resurrection 
unto  everlasting  life ;  and  whereby  the  parties  baptized  are 
solemnly  admitted  into  the  visible  church,  and  enter  into  an 
open  and  professed  engagement  to  be  wholly  and  only  the 
Lord's." 

The  doctrine  of  the  Confession  is  more  fully  declared  in  chap. 
28,  sec.  1 ; — to  which  we  invite  attention.  It  is  in  the  words 
following : — 

"  Baptism  is  a  sacrament  of  the  New  Testament,  ordained  by 
Jesus  Christ,  not  only  for  the  solemn  admission  of  the  party 
baptized,  into  the  visible  church ;  but  also  to  be  unto  him  a  sign 
and  seal  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  of  his  ingrafting  into  Christ, 
of  regeneration,  of  remission  of  sins,  and  of  his  giving  up  unto 
God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  to  walk  in  newness  of  life :  which 
sacrament  is,  by  Christ's  own  appointment,  to  be  continued  in 
his  church  until  the  end  of  the  world." 

14.  To  the  same  effect  speak  other  Confessions  of  Faith,  such 
as — 

15.  Episcopalian  :  The  clergy  are  ordered,  before  proceeding 
to  baptize,  to  make  the  following  prayer  :* 

"Almighty  and  everlasting  God,  who,  of  thy  great  mercy, 
didst  save  Noah  and  his  family  in  the  Ark  from  perishing  by 
water  ;  and  also  didst  safely  lead  the  children  of  Israel,  thy  peo-, 
pie,  through  the  Red  Sea ;  figuring  thereby  thy  holy  baptism ; 
and  by  the  baptism  of  thy  well-beloved  Son  Jesus  Christ  in  the 
river  Jordan,  didst  sanctify  the  element  water,  to  the  mystical 
washing  away  of  sin ;  we  beseech  thee,  for  thine  infinite  mer- 
cies, that  thou  wilt  mercifully  look  upon  tJieBe  thy  servants  ;  wash 
them  and  sanctify  tliem  with  the  Holy  Ghost ;  that  iJie]),  being 
delivered  from  thy  wrath,  may  be  received  into  the  Ark  of 
Christ's  church ;  and  being  steadfast  in  faith,  joyful  through 
hope,  and  rooted  in  charity,  may  so  pass  the  waves  of  this 
troublesome  world,  that,  finally,  they  may  come  to  the  land  of 
everlasting  life ;  there  to  reign  with  thee,  world  without  end, 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen." 

After  reading  a  part  of  the  discourse  with  Nicodemus,  they 
are  ordered  to  make  the  following  exhortation:! 

*  Common  Prayer,  p.  165.  f  Page  165. 

23 


266  DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM. 

"Beloved,  ye  hear  in  tkis  gospel  the  express  words  of  our 
Saviour  Christ,  that  except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  Whereby  ye 
may  perceive  the  great  necessity  of  this  sacrament,  where  it 
may  be  had.  Likewise,  immediately  before  his  ascension  into 
heaven,  (as  we  read  in  the  last  chapter  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel,) 
he  gave  command  to  his  disciples,  saying,  Go  ye  into  all  the 
world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that  be- 
lieveth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  believeth  not, 
shall  be  damned.  Which  also  showeth  unto  us  the  great  bene- 
fit we  reap  thereby.  For  which  cause,  St.  Peter  the  Apostle, 
when,  upon  his  first  preaching  of  the  gospel,  many  were  pricked 
at  the  heart,  and  said  to  him  and  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  Men 
and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?  replied  and  said  unto  them, 
Repent  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  for  the 
promise  is  to  you  and  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  ofi", 
even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call.  And  with  many 
other  words  exhorted  he  them,  saying,  Save  yourselves  from  this 
untoward  generation.  For,  as  the  same  Apostle  testifieth  in 
another  place,  even  baptism  doth  also  now  save  us,  (not  the 
putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good 
conscience  towards  God,)  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Doubt  ye  not,  therefore,  but  earnestly  believe  that  he  will  fa- 
vourably receive  these  present  persons,  truly  repenting,  and 
coming  unto  him  by  faith ;  that  he  will  grant  them  remission  of 
their  sins,  and  bestow  upon  them  the  Holy  Ghost ;  that  he  will 
give  them  the  blessing  of  eternal  life,  and  make  tliem  paiiakers 
of  his  everlasting  kingdom. '^ 

IG.  The  Methodist  Creed  says : — ■ 

"Dearly  beloved,  forasmuch  as  all  men  are  conceived  and 
born  in  sin,  (and  that  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,  and 
they  that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God,  but  live  in  sin, 
committing  many  actual  transgressions :)  and  that  our  Saviour 
Christ  saith.  None  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  except 
he  be  regenerate  and  born  anew  of  water  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  I  beseech  you  to  call  upon  God  the  Father  througli 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  of  his  bounteous  goodness  he  will 
grant  to  these  persons  that  which  by  nature  they  cannot  have ; 
that  the}/  may  be  baptized  with  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
received  into  Christ's  holy  church,  and  be  made  lively  members 
of  the  same." 

Then,  it  is  ordained  that  the  minister  say,  or  repeat,  the  fol- 
lowing prayer : — 

"Almighty  and  immortal  God,  the  aid  of  all  that  need,  the 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  267 

helper  of  all  that  flee  to  thee  for  succour,  the  life  of  them  that  be- 
lieve, and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead :  We  call  upon  thee  for 
these  persons,  that  they,  coming  to  thy  holy  baptism,  may  receive 
remission  of  their  sins,  by  spiritual  regeneration.  Receive  them, 
O  Lord,  as  thou  hast  promised  by  thy  well-beloved  Son,  saying, 
Ask,  and  ye  shall  receive,  seek,  and  ye  shall  find,  knock,  and  it 
shall  be  opened  unto  you  ;  so  give  unto  us  that  ask  ;  let  us  that 
seek  find ;  open  the  gate  to  us  that  knock ;  that  these  persons 
may  enjoy  the  everlasting  benediction  of  the  heavenly  washing, 
and  may  come  to  the  eternal  kingdom  which  thou  hast  promised 
by  Christ  our  Lord.     AmenJ^     Dis.  p.  105. 

17.  Baptist'.  Chapter  xxx.  sec.  1. — "Baptism  is  an  ordinance 
of  the  New  Testament,  ordained  by  Jesus  Christ,  to  be  unto  the 
party  baptized  a  sign  of  his  fellowship  with  him  in  his  death 
and  resurrection ;  of  his  being  ingrafted  into  him  ;  of  remission 
of  sins,  and  of  his  giving  up  unto  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  to 
live  and  walk  in  newness  of  life.'' 

The  Baptist  follows  the  Presbyterian  church  as  servilely  as 
the  Methodist  church  follows  the  English  hierarchy.  But  she 
avows  her  faith  that  immersion  is  a  sign  of  remission.  A  sign 
of  the  past,  the  present,  or  the  future !     A  sign  accompanying! 

18.  Confession  of  Bohemia:  *'  We  believe  that  whatsoever,  by 
baptism,  is  in  the  outward  ceremony  signified  and  witnessed,  all 
that  doth  the  Lord  God  perform  inwardly.  That  is,  he  washeth 
away  sin,  begetteth  a  man  again,  and  bestoweth  salvation  upon 
him :  for  the  bestowing  of  these  excellent  fruits  was  holy  bap- 
tism given  and  granted  to  the  church." 

19.^  Confession  of  Augsburg :  "Concerning  baptism,  they  teach 
that  it  is  necessary  to  salvation,  as  a  ceremony  ordained  of 
Christ :  also,  by  baptism  the  grace  of  God  is  ofi'ered.'' 

20.  Confession  of  Saxony :  "  I  baptize  thee — that  is,  I  do  wit- 
ness that,  by  this  dipping,  thy  sins  be  washed  away,  and  that 
thou  art  now  received  of  the  true  God.'' 

21.  Confession  of  Wittenhurg :  "We  believe  and  confess  that 
baptism  is  that  sea,  into  the  bottom  whereof,  as  the  Prophet 
eaith,  God  doth  cast  all  our  sins." 

22.  Confession  of  Helvetia :  "  To  be  baptized  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  is  to  be  enrolled,  entered,  and  received  into  the  covenant 
and  family,  and  so  into  the  inheritance  of  the  sons  of  God ;  that 
is  to  say,  to  be  called  the  sons  of  God,  to  be  purged  also  from 
the  filthiness  of  sins,  and  to  be  endued  with  the  manifold  grace 
of  God,  for  to  lead  a  new  and  innocent  life." 

23.  Confession  of  Sueveland:  "As  touching  baptism,  we  con- 
fess that  it  is  the  font  of  regeneration,  washeth  away  sins  and 
saveth  us.  But  all  these  things  we  do  understand  as  Peter  doth 
interpret  them.    1  Peter  iii.  21," 


268  DESIGN   OP  BAPTISM. 

Could  any  thing  be  added  confirmatory  of  the  creeds,  we 
should  look  to  the  great  ecclesiastic  fathers,  such  as — 

1.  Barnabas,  in  his  Catholic  Epistle,  chap,  xi.,  says: — "Let 
us^  now  inquire  whether  the  Lord  took  care  to  manifest  any 
thing  beforehand,  concerning  water  and  the  cross.  Now,  for  the 
former  of  these,  it  is  written  to  the  people  of  Israel,  how  they 
shall  not  receive  that  baptism  which  brings  to  forgiveness  of 
sins ;  but  shall  institute  another  to  themselves  that  cannot.  For 
thus  saith  the  Prophet,  *  Be  astonished,  O  heavens  !  and  let  the 
earth  tremble  at  it ;  because  this  people  have  done  two  great 
and  wicked  things :  They  have  left  me,  the  fountain  of  living 
waters,  and  have  digged  for  themselves  broken  cisterns  that  can 
hold  no  water.  Is  my  holy  mountain,  Zion,  a  desolate  wilder- 
ness ?  For  he  shall  be  as  a  young  bird  when  its  nest  is  taken 
away.'  'Consider  how  he  hath  joined  both  the  cross  and  the 
water  together.'  For  this  he  saith:  'Blessed  are  tlieij,  ivho,  putting 
their  trust  in  the  cross,  descend  into  the  water  ;  for  they  shall  have 
their  reward  in  due  time :  then,  saith  he,  will  I  give  it  them.' 
But,  as  concerning  the  present  time,  he  saith,  'Their  leaves  shall 
not  fail.'  Meaning  thereby,  that  every  word  that  shall  go  out 
of  your  mouth,  shall,  through  faith  and  charity,  be  to  the  con- 
version and  hope  of  many.  In  like  manner  does  another  Pro- 
phet speak :  '  And  the  land  of  Jacob  was  the  praise  of  all  the 
earth ;'  magnifying  thereby  the  vessels  of  his  Spirit.  And 
what  follows  ?  *  And  there  was  a  river  running  on  the  right 
hand,  and  beautiful  trees  grew  up  by  it ;  and  he  that  shall  eat 
of  them  shall  live  for  ever.'  The  signification  of  which  is  this: 
that  we  go  down  into  the  water,  full  of  sins  and  pollutions  ;  hut 
come  up  again  bringing  forth  fniit ;  having  in  our  hearts  the  fear 
and  hope  lohich  are  in  Jesus  hy  the  Spirit :  '  And  whosoever  shall 
eat  of  them  shall  live  for  ever.'  That  is,  whosoever  shall  hearken 
to  those  that  call  them,  and  shall  believe,  shall  live  for  ever." 

2.  Hennas  deposes  as  follows,  in  a  work  of  his,  called  "  The 
Commands  of  Hermas  :" — 

"And  I  said  to  him,  *I  have  even  now  heard  from  certain 
teachers,  that  there  is  no  other  repentance  besides  that  of  bap- 
tism; when  we  go  down  into  the  water,  and  receive  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins ;  and  after  that  we  should  sin  no  more,  but  live 
in  purity.'  And  he  said  to  me — 'Thou  hast  been  rightly  in- 
formed.' " 

3.  Justin  Martyr  wrote  about  forty  years  after  John  the  Apos- 
tle died;  and  stands  most  conspicuous  among  the  primitive 
fathers.  He  addressed  an  Apology  to  the  Emperor  Antoninus 
Pius.    In  this  apology,  he  narrates  the  practices  of  the  Chris- 


DESiaN  OP  BAPTISM.  269 

tians,  and  the  reasons  of  them.  Concerning  those  who  are  per- 
suaded and  believe  the  things  which  are  taught,  and  who  pro- 
mise to  live  according  to  them,  he  writes : — 

"  Then  we  bring  them  to  some  place  where  there  is  water, 
and  they  are  regenerated  by  the  same  way  of  regeneration  by 
which  we  were  regenerated :  for  they  are  washed  in  water,  [en  to 
udati,)  in  the  name  of  God  the  Father  and  Lord  of  all  things, 
and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit:  for 
Christ  says,  *  Unless  you  be  regenerated,  you  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven ;'  and  every  body  knows  it  is  impossible 
for  those  who  are  once  generated  (or  born)  to  enter  again  into 
their  mother's  womb.'^ 

4.  TertuUian,  the  first  who  mentions  infant  baptism,  flourished 
about  A.  D,  216.  He  writes  against  the  practice :  and  among 
his  most  conclusive  arguments  against  infant  immersion,  (for 
then  there  was  no  sprinkling,)  he  assumes,  as  a  fundamental 
principle  not  to  be  questioned,  that  immersion  was  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins ;  and  this  being  universally  conceded,  he  argues 
as  follows  :— 

*'Our  Lord  says,  indeed,  'Do  not  forbid  them  to  come  to  me;' 
therefore,  let  them  come  when  they  are  grown  up — let  them 
come  when  they  understand — when  they  are  instructed  whither 
it  is  that  they  come.  Let  them  be  made  Christians  when  they 
can  know  Christ.  What  need  their  guiltless  age  make  such 
haste  to  iJie  forgiveness  of  sins?  Men  will  proceed  more  warily 
in  worldly  goods ;  and  he  that  should  not  have  earthly  goods 
committed  to  him,  yet  shall  have  heavenly !  Let  them  know 
how  to  desire  this  salvation,  that  you  may  appear  to  have  given 
to  one  that  asketh.'^    P.  74. 

5.  Origen,  though  so  great  a  visionary,  is,  nevertheless,  a 
competent  witness  in  any  question  of  fact.  And  here  I  would 
again  remind  the  reader,  that  it  is  as  witnesses  in  a  question  of 
fact,  and  not  of  opinion,  we  summon  these  ancients.  It  is  not 
to  tell  their  own  opinions  or  the  reasons  of  them ;  but  to  depose 
what  were  the  views  of  Christians  on  this  institution  in  their 
times.  There  was  no  controversy  on  this  subject  for  more  than 
four  hundred  years  ;  and,  therefore,  we  only  expect  to  find  inci- 
dental allusions  to  it ;  but  these  are  numerous,  and  of  the  most 
unquestionable  character.  Origen,  in  his  homily  upon  Luke, 
says : — 

"Infants  are  baptized  for  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins.  Of 
-what  sins?     Or,  when  have  they  sinned?     Or,  how  can  any  rea- 

23* 


270  DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM.  ' 

son  of  the  law,  in  their  case,  hold  good,  but  according  to  that 
sense  that  we  mentioned  even  now  ?  (that  is)  none  is  free  from 
pollution,  though  his  life  be  but  the  leng*th  of  one  day  upon  the 
earth/^ 

And  in  another  place  he  says,  that — 

*'  The  baptism  of  the  church  is  given  for  the  remission  of 
sins/' 

And  again — 

"If  there  were  nothing  in  infants  that  wanted  forgiveness  and 
mercy,  the  grace  of  baptism  would  be  needless  to  them.'' 

In  another  place,  he  says — 

''But  in  the  regeneration,  (or  new  birth,]  by  the  laver,  (or  bap- 
tism,) every  one  that  is  born  again  of  water  and  the  Spirit, 
is  clear  from  pollution :  clear  (as  I  may  venture  to  say)  as  by  a 
glass  darkly.'' 

6.  And  as  for  CJirysostom,  he  expressly  says: — 

"In  baptism,  or  the  spiritual  circumcision,  there  is  no  trouble 
to  be  undergone,  but  to  throw  off  the  load  of  sins,  and  receive 
pardon  for  all  foregoing  offences." 

And  again — 

"  There  is  no  receiving  or  having  the  bequeathed  inheritance 
before  one  is  baptized ;  and  none  can  be  called  a  son  until  he  is 
baptized." 

7.  Cyprian :  "While,"  says  he,  "I lay  in  darkness  and  uncer- 
tainty, I  thought  on  what  I  had  heard  of  a  second  birth,  pro- 
posed by  the  divine  goodness,  but  could  not  comprehend  how  a 
man  could  receive  a  new  life  from  his  being  immersed  in  water, 
cease  to  be  what  he  was  before,  and  still  remain  the  same  body. 
How,  said  I,  can  such  a  change  be  possible  ?  How  can  he,  who 
is  grown  old  in  a  worldly  way  of  living,  strip  himself  of  his  for- 
mer inclinations  and  inveterate  habits  ?  Can  he,  who  has  spent 
his  whole  time  in  plenty,  and  indulged  his  appetite  without  re- 
straint, ever  be  transformed  into  an  example  of  frugality  and 
sobriety  ?  Or  he  who  has  always  appeared  in  splendid  a])parel, 
stoop  to  the  plain,  simple,  and  unadorned  dress  of  the  common 
people  ?  It  is  impossible  for  a  man,  who  has  borne  the  most 
honourable  posts,  ever  to  submit  to  lead  a  private  and  obscure 
life :  or,  that  he  who  was  never  seen  in  public  without  a  crowd 
of  attendants  and  persons  who  endeavoured  to  make  their  for- 
tunes by  attending  him,  should  ever  bear  to  be  alone.  This," 
continues  he,  "was  my  way  of  arguing:  I  thought  it  was  im- 
possible for  me  to  leave  my"  former  course  of  life,  and  the  habits 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  271 

T  was  then  engaged  in  and  -accustomed  to ;  but  no  sooner  did 
the  life-giving  water  wash  the  spots  off  my  soul,  than  my  heart 
received  the  heavenly  light  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  trans- 
formed me  into  a  new  creature  ;  all  my  difficulties  were  cleared, 
my  doubts  dissolved,  and  my  darkness  dispelled.  I  was  then 
able  to  do  what  before  seemed  impossible :  could  discern  that 
my  former  life  was  earthly  and  sinful,  according  to  the  impurity 
of  my  birth ;  but  that  my  spiritual  birth  gave  me  new  ideas  and 
inclinations,  and  directed  all  my  views  to  God." 

Cyprian  flourished  a.  d.  250. 

On  what  occasion  or  on  what  question  could  we,  with  more 
propriety  or  with  more  confidence  than  on  the  present,  ask — 
"What  need  have  ice  of  farther  testimony?  We  have  heard  the 
Harbinger  of  the  Messiah  and  the  Messiah  himself;  we  have 
heard  his  holy  Apostles  and  Evangelists ;  we  have  heard  the 
primitive  Apostolic  church,  the  most  venerable  and  reputable 
ecclesiastic  fathers ;  we  have  heard  the  Hebrew  church,  the 
Greek  church,  the  Roman  church,  and  all  Dissenting  churches 
confess  "one  baptism  for  the  remission  or  sins."  We  have 
not  only  heard  the  renowned  founders,  reformers,  and  acknow- 
ledged oracles  of  all  Protestant  parties,  but  also  have  read  in 
their  own  words,  in  the  symbols,  creeds,  and  formulas  of  their 
communion  and  intercommunion,  their  expositions  and  defences 
of  Christian  baptism  as  a  sign  and  a  seal  of  remission  of  all  past 
sins — and  again  of  confession  and  petition  as  the  means  of  par- 
don for  all  sins  committed  after  baptism.  There  is  not  only  a 
general,  but,  I  might  say,  a  universal  admission  of  the  theory, 
with  comparatively  few  dissentients,  as  respects  the  practice 
and  explicit  dispensation  of  the  ordinance  for  this  purpose. 

Some,  nay  many,  have  taught  and  exhibited  baptism  alone  as 
an  effectual  mean  of  salvation  and  pardon.  Hence  originated 
infant  baptism ;  and  hence,  too,  originated  a  denial  of  baptism 
for  remission  of  sins.  This  is  the  history  of  the  whole  contro- 
versy in  one  sentence.  The  Greek  and  Roman  churches,  during 
their  apostasy,  taught  baptism  alone,  or  without  faith,  for  re- 
mission of  sins.  Some  of  the  reformed  churches,  while  they 
practised  the  papal  rite  of  sprinkling  babes,  repudiated  its  con- 
nection with  the  remission  of  sins ;  but  were  never  able  to  give 
a  good  reason  for  this  practice  that  did  not  imply  such  a  belief. 

Baptists,  too,  borrowing  every  thing  from  their  Pedobaptist 
"brethren  but  the  subject  and  action  of  baptism,  have  reduced  it 


272  DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM. 

to  a  mere  form  of  making);  the  Christian  profession — a  door  into 
their  cliurch.  But  when  in,  they  harmonize  in  every  thing  with 
those  without  the  pale  of  their  communion,  orthodox  in  their 
opinions  of  the  true  theory  of  Christian  doctrine.  So  that, 
among  all  these  parties,  there  is  no  true  and  scriptural  dispen- 
sation of  Christian  baptism. 

Baptism,  according  to  the  Apostolic  church,  is  both  "a  sign^^ 
and  "a  seal"  of  remission  of  all  former  sins.  In  this  sense 
only  does  "  baptism  now  save  us."  Not  in  putting  away  the 
filth  of  the  flesh,  but  in  obtaining  a  good  conscience  through 
faith  in  the  death  and  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  This 
faith  in  our  hearts  is  expressed  in  the  sirfn  of  baptism,  our 
burial  and  resurrection  with  him,  indicated  by  an  immersion  in 
water  and  an  emersion  out  of  it. 

Circumcision  is  said  to  have  been,  in  one  case  at  least,  a  sign 
and  a  seal.  Baptism,  in  the  same  sense,  and  in  a  similar  case, 
is  also  both  a  sign  and  a  seal — the  sign,  however,  at  most,  ia 
only  indicative  of  what  has  been  sealed.  Such,  indeed,  are  all 
sensible  signs.  The  sense,  we  may  say,  is  in  the  sign,  and  the 
confirmations  in  the  seal.  This  circumcision,  or  cutting  round, 
and  cutting  ofi",  was  a  sign  of  the  insulation  or  separation  of 
Abraham  and  his  seed  from  every  other  nation  and  people. 
But  to  Abraham  himself,  previously  possessed  of  faith  in  the 
promised  Messiah,  it  was  also  a  seal,  or  confirmation  of  that 
faith  and  its  rightfulness  which  he  had  experienced  and  ex- 
pressed before  he  was  circumcised.  But  such  it  was  not  to 
either  Ishmael  or  Isaac.  To  them  it  was  a  sign  of  their  sepa- 
ration from  other  tribes,  and  a  people,  and  a  confirmation  that 
they  were  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  and  heirs  of  Canaan,  accord- 
ing to  a  divine  charter. 

13aptism,  though  not  an  antetype  of  a  type,  a  sign  of  a  sign, 
or  a  seal  of  a  seal,  as  some  system-makers  would  make  it  when 
representing  it  as  coming  in  the  room  and  standing  in  the  stead 
of  circumcision,  is,  indeed,  analogous  to  circumcision,  as  the 
Sabbath  to  the  Lord's  day,  or  as  the  Passover  to  the  Lord's 
supper,  especially  in  this  : — that  in  one  point  it  is  a  sign  of  the 
burial  and  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  of  our  burial  and 
resurrection  in  and  with  him  ;  and,  in  another  point  of  viaw,  a 
seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  or  the  remission  of  all  our 
past  sins,  through  faith  in  his  blood,  then,  and  in  that  act,  pu+)- 
licly  expressed  and  confirmed.     This,  most  unquestionably,  is 


DESIGN  OP  BAPTISM.  273 

its  place,  its  meaning,  and  importance  in  the  Christian  institu- 
tion. This,  and  no  other  view  of  it,  now  entertained  by  profess- 
\r\^  Christians,  fully  expounds  and  exhausts  all  that  is  said  of 
it  in  the  Apostolic  Scriptures,  in  the  abstracts  of  Christian  doc- 
trine and  formulas  of  the  primitive  and  ancient  church,  as  well 
as  in  the  sayings  and  expositions  of  our  most  gifted,  learned, 
and  Christian  expositors  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  a  few  sam- 
ples of  which,  and  but  a  few  of  those  in  our  possession,  have 
now  been  presented  to  the  reader.  Yet  these  are,  we  presume 
to  say,  enough  to  reconcile  us  to  such  sayings  as  these : — "  lie 
that  believes  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved.''  "  Repent  and  be 
baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  for 
the  remission  of  sins."  "Arise  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away 
your  sins."  "  The  like  figure  corresponding  thereunto,  baptism 
doth  save  us,"  &c.  &c.  Not,  indeed,  that  there  is  anything  in  the 
mere  element  of  water,  or  in  the  form  of  placing  the  subject  in 
it,  or  in  the  person  that  administers  it,  or  in  the  formula  used 
upon  the  occasion,  though  both  good  taste  and  piety  have  some- 
thing to  do  in  these  particulars,  but  all  its  virtue  and  efficacy  is 
in  the  faith  and  intelligence  of  him  that  receives  it. 

To  him  that  believeth  and  repenteth  of  his  sins,  and  to  none 
else,  then,  we  may  safely  say,  "  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of 
your  sins,"  and  it  will  surely  be  granted  by  the  Lord,  and  en- 
joyed by  the  subject  with  an  assurance  and  an  evidence  which 
the  word  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  alone  can  bestow. 


BOOK  FIFTH. 
CHAPTER  I. 

ADOPTION. 

Antecedent  and  consequent  are  relative  terms.  A  conse- 
quent is  that  which  follows  from,  or  is  dependent  upon,  an  ante- 
cedent ; — the  result  of  an  instituted  connection  between  it  and 
that  which  precedes  it,  in  nature  or  by  appointment. 

There  is  a  conventional  and  artificial,  as  well  as  a  natural  and 
necessary,  connection  between  antecedents  and  consequents. 
Consequents  in  grammar,  logic,  mathematics,  religion,  though 
always  dependent  in  some  way  upon  their  respective  antece- 
dents, are  not  in  the  same  sense,  nor  always,  when  in  the  same 
sense,  in  the  same  degree  dependent  upon  their  antecedents. 

In  nature,  the  succession  of  day  and  night,  of  summer  and 
winter,  of  seed-time  and  harvest  are  essentially  natural  conse- 
quents, because  the  effects  of  the  motions  of  the  earth.  While 
the  earth  remains,  they  must  continue.  But  the  motions  of  a 
wheel,  by  the  weight  and  motion  of  water  upon  it,  are  conse- 
quents both  of  nature  and  of  art  combined. 

In  things  mental  and  spiritual,  the  connection  between  moral 
and  spiritual  antecedents  and  consequents  is  not  to  be  measured 
by  time,  or  the  motions  of  bodies.  A  perception,  a  thought,  a 
volition,  and  an  action  may  be  so  simultaneous  as  to  baffle  all 
the  measures  of  time.  Still  they  are,  in  nature  or  by  divine 
appointment,  antecedent  and  consequent,  though  they  may  not 
stand  to  each  other  as  cause  and  effect.  But  who  can  satisfac- 
torily trace  the  connection  between  antecedents  and  consequents 
in  the  operations  of  nature  in  many  of  her  most  beautiful  and 
beneficent  developments?  Take,  for  example,  some  of  her  sub- 
lime processes  in  crystallization.  Who  can  explain  her  operations 
in  converting  certain  fiuids  into  various  solid  bodies  of  the  most 

271 


CONSEQUENTS   OE  BAPTISM.  275 

beautiful  and  grotesque  forms  and  of  the  most  variegated  co- 
lours. Who  can  explain  the  phenomena  of  their  polarity,  which 
causes  one  particle  of  matter  to  attract  an  atom  of  another  par- 
ticle and  to  repel  the  other  parts  of  it,  so  as  to  form  numerous 
sides  bounded  by  plane  surfaces?  Who  can  enumerate  and 
arrange  the  antecedents  and  consequents  acting  and  reacting  in 
converting  the  contents  of  an  egg  into  a  well-formed  and  well- 
fledged  peacock  ? 

The  mysteries  of  a  spiritual  process  on  the  inner  man  are  not 
more  incomprehensible  than  the  mysteries  of  that  incubation 
which  forms  bones,  muscles,  arteries,  veins,  skin,  feathers,  and 
hairs  out  of  the  yolk  of  an  egg.  Still,  it  is  in  the  way  of  ante- 
cedents and  consequents,  in  action  and  in  reaction. 

In  making  a  son  of  God  out  of  a  son  of  man,  as  he  now  is, 
the  process  may  be  more  sublime  and  spiritual,  but  not  more 
mysterious  and  incomprehensible.  There  is  the  spirit  of  man, 
paralyzed  and  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  energized,  quickened, 
and  transformed  by  the  power  of  Divine  truth,  perceived,  re- 
ceived, and  obeyed.  Here  are  antecedents  and  consequents  not 
governed  by  the  laws  of  matter.  Hence  faith,  repentance,  and 
baptism  are  severally  essential  to  the  exhibition,  development, 
and  perfection  of  the  Christian  man.  Faith  and  truth,  repent- 
ance and  death  unto  sin,  baptism  or  a  burial  and  resurrection 
with  Christ,  are  as  much  antecedents  and  consequents  respect- 
ing one  another  as  are  oxygen,  caloric,  and  light  to  animal  life 
and  comfort. 

But  we  do  not  separate  these,  in  nature  nor  in  operation,  from 
one  another:  no  more  can  we  separate  faith,  repentance,  and 
baptism,  in  regeneration  or  conversion,  according  to  the  spi- 
ritual agencies  concurrent  in  forming  a  new  man  out  of  an  old 
man.  We  are,  indeed,  enlightened,  converted ;  or,  rather,  we 
are  enlightened,  quickened,  regenerated,  justified,  adopted,  sanc- 
tified, and  saved  by  the  truth  believed  and  obeyed.  Faith  and 
obedience  are  in  embryo,  twin  sisters  in  the  heart  of  a  convert; 
and  are  developed,  manifested,  and  perfected  by  the  overt  acts 
of  confession  and  profession,  or  by  faith  and  baptism. 

When,  then,  we  say  that  justification,  sanctification,  and  adop- 
tion are  consequent  upon  faith,  repentance,  and  baptism,  we 
mean  not  to  place  repentance  and  baptism  on  a  level  with  faith, 
or  as  worth  g,ny  thing  without  it.  Nay,  indeed,  we  rather  re- 
gard baptism  as  deriving  all  its  value  from  faith,  and  as  being 


276  CONSEQUENTS   OF   BAPTISM. 

an  embodied  and  formal  profession  of  it.  "For,  as  faith,  with- 
out works,  is  dead,  being  alone,"  so  baptism,  without  faith, 
is  a  mere  useless  ceremony,  and  in  no  respect  benefits,  rather, 
indeed,  injures  its  subject.  Even  faith  itself  is  of  no  value 
separated  from  the  blood  of  Christ.  Our  life  spiritual  is  found 
in  the  moral  of  his  blood.  For,  as  nothing  which  we  eat  can 
enter,  but  by  its  death  and  dissolution,  into  our  blood  and  life, 
so  nothing  that  Christ  did,  apart  from  what  he  suffered,  can 
ever  enter  into  our  spiritual  life,  health,  and  moral  consti- 
tution. 

Baptism  being  the  last  of  the  series  of  truth,  faith,  repent- 
ance, love,  and  profession,  it  is  properly  styled,  in  figure,  "being 
born  again,"  or  being  "born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit."  And 
faith  being  an  active,  operative  principle,  containing  in  it  all 
that  is  in  the  gospel  of  Christ's  blood,  it  is  the  vitalizing  prin- 
ciple of  Christian  activity  and  of  all  Christian  excellence  and 
enjoyment. 

Adoption  is  usually  placed  after  justification,  in  our  systems 
of  scholastic  theology.  We  are  not  in  possession  of  any  good 
reason  for  this  peculiar  arrangement.  "Because  you  are  sons," 
says  Paul,  "God  has  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your 
hearts,  breathing  Abba,  Father." 

Adoption,  indeed,  is  a  mere  act  of  Divine  favour,  much  more 
glorious  on  the  part  of  God,  than  the  adoption  of  a  squalid 
wretch  on  the  part  of  a  king,  to  be  an  heir  in  common  with  his 
own  son.  In  our  baptism,  we  are  born  into  the  Divine  family, 
enrolled  in  heaven.  We  receive  justification  or  pardon,  we  are 
separated  or  sanctified  to  God,  and  glorified  by  the  inspiration 
of  his  own  Spirit. 

While  justification  and  sanctification,  especially  the  latter, 
occupy  a  very  large  space  in  Apostolic  Christianity,  adoption 
is  but  occasionally  named  or  alluded  to.  It  is  wholly  and 
exclusively  a  work  of  Divine  grace.  But  justification  and 
sanctification — although  the  former  is  really  no  more  than  par- 
don, and  the  latter  no  more  than  separation  to  God,  to  his  ser- 
vice, to  his  and  our  glory — cover  a  large  space  in  the  remedial 
economy. 

We  shall,  therefore,  develop  more  at  length  justification  and 
sanctification ;  the  former  of  which  changes  our  state,  and 
the  latter  not  only  our  state,  but  our  'character.  We  shall, 
however,  in  doing  this,  present  them  as  the  consequents  of 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  277 

Christian  baptism,  as  Paul  does,  when  he  says,  "But  you  are 
washed,"  in  baptism,  "but  you  are  justified,  but  you  are  sanc- 
tified in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  and  by  the  Spirit  of  our 
God/' 


CHAPTER,  11. 

JUSTIFICATION. 


"If  any  man  be  in  Christ,"  says  Paul,  "he  is  a  new  creation; 
old  things  have  passed  away ;  all  things  have  become  new." 
By  the  special  favour  of  God,  Jesus  Christ  "  is  made  unto  us 
wisdom,  justification,  sanctification,  and  redemption."  Hence, 
as  saith  the  Prophet,  "In  him  shall  all  the  seed  of  Israel  be 
justified,  and  in  him  shall  they  glory."  "He  that  boasteth," 
therefore,  "  let  him  boast  in  the  Lord." 

What,  then,  is  justification,  the  first  fruit  of  this  heavenly 
cluster  of  Divine  graces  ?  It  is,  indeed,  a  trite  but  a  true  say- 
ing, that  the  term  justification  is  a  forensic  word ;  and,  there- 
fore, indicates  that  its  subject  has  been  accused  of  crime,  or  of 
the  transgression  of  law.  It  also  implies  that  the  subject  of  it 
has  not  only  been  accused  and  tried,  but  also  acquitted.  Such, 
then,  is  legal  or  forensic  justification.  It  is,  indeed,  a  sen- 
tence of  acquittal  announced  by  a  tribunal,  importing  that  the 
accused  is  found  not  guilty.  If  convicted,  he  cannot  be  justi- 
fied ;  if  justified,  he  has  not  been  convicted. 

But,  such  is  not  justification  by  grace.  Evangelical  justifica- 
tion is  the  justification  of  one  that  has  been  convicted  as  guilty 
before  God,  the  Supreme  and  Ultimate  Judge  of  the  Universe. 
But  the  whole  world  has  been  tried  and  found  guilty  before 
God.  So  that,  in  fact,  "there  is  none  righteous;  no,  not  one." 
Therefore,  by  deeds  of  law,  no  man  can  be  justified  before  God. 
"For  should  a  man  keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  ofiend  in  one 
point,  he  is  guilty  of  all."  He  has -.despised  the  whole  authority 
of  the  law  and  the  Lawgiver.  It  is,  then,  utterly  impossible 
that  any  sinner  can  be  forensically  or  legally  justified  before 
God,  by  a  law  which  he  has  in  any  one  instance  violated. 

If,  then,  a  sinner  be  justified,  it  must  be  on  some  other  prin- 
ciple than  law.  He  must  be  justified  by  favour  and  not  by 
right.    Still  it  must  be  rightfully  done  by  him  that  justifies  a 

24 


278  CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

transgression,  else  he  will  be  liable  to  the  charge  of  injustice  to 
the  law  and  the  government.  This  is  the  emergency  which 
must  be  met  by  evangelical  justification.  The  mission  and  me- 
diation of  the  Messiah  were  primarily  to  meet  this  emergency ; 
though,  indeed,  he  has  done  much  more  than  to  meet  it.  Evan- 
gelical justification  is,  therefore,  a  justification  by  favour  as 
respects  man ;  and  it  has  been  made  just  also  on  the  part  of 
God,  by  the  sacrifice  or  obedience  unto  death  of  his  Son.  Still 
it  must  be  regarded  as  not  a  real  or  legal  justification.  It  is,  as 
respects  man,  only  pardon,  or  forgiveness  of  the  past ;  but  the 
pardoned  sinner  being  ever  after  treated  and  regarded  as 
though  he  were  righteous,  he  is  constituted  and  treated  as 
righteous  before  God.  He  is  as  cordially  received  into  the  fa- 
vour and  friendship  of  God,  as  though  he  had  never  at  any  time 
offended  against  his  law.  This,  then,  is  what  is  peculiarly  and 
appropriately  called  "evangelical  justification. '^  Still,  legally 
contemplated,  God,  in  fact,  ''justifies  the  ungodly."  And  so 
teaches  the  Apostle  Paul. 

But  every  one  of  reflection  Avill  inquire,  How  can  the  justifi- 
cation of  the  ungodly  be  regarded  as  compatible  with  the  jus- 
tice, the  purity,  the  truthfulness  of  God?  How  can  he  stand 
justified  before  the  pure,  and  holy,  and  righteous  peers  of  his 
celestial  realm — the  hierarchs  and  princes  of  heaven  ?  This  is, 
indeed,  to  very  many,  a  profound  mystery.  And  "great,"  truly, 
"is  the  mystery  of  godliness."  Standing  at  this  point,  and 
viewing  it  in  all  its  bearings,  heaven  is  always  in  rapture  while 
contemplating  this  new,  and  grand,  and  glorious  revelation  of 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God.  It  is,  however,  a  revealed  mys- 
tery. One  there  is,  and  was,  and  evermore  will  be,  who,  by  his 
obedience  to  that  violated  law,  even  unto  death,  has  so  magnified 
and  made  honourable  that  law  and  government,  as  to  open  a 
channel  through  which  truth,  righteousness,  and  mercy  can  har- 
moniously flow  together  and  justify  God  while  justifying  the 
sinner,  by  pardoning  him,  and  then  treating  him  as  though  ho 
never  had  sinned  against  his  throne  and  government. 

His  death  was,  therefore,  contemplated  as  the  one  only  true, 
real,  and  adequate  sin-offering  ever  presented  in  this  universe, 
in  the  presence  of  God,  angels,  men,  and  demons,  that  does  for 
ever  justify  God  in  justifying  man.  It  will  for  ever  silence  all 
demur,  and  fill  the  universe,  heaven  and  eternity,  with  the 
praise  of  the  Lord.     Hence,  in  perfect  harmony  with  all  the 


CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  279 

types  of  the  law,  the  oracles  of  the  Prophets,  and  the  promises 
and  covenants  of  God,  he  is  truly,  rightfully,  and  with  the  em- 
phatic seal  of  God,  surnamed  "Jehovah  our  Righteousness." 
Therefore,  as  saith  Isaiah,  "By  the  knowledge  of  him  shall  my 
righteous  servant  justify  many  whose  iniquities  he  shall  have 
borne.'^ 

How,  then,  is  it  dispensed  ?  or,  rather,  how  is  it  received  and 
enjoyed  ?  "  It  is  through  faith,"  says  Paul,  "  that  it  might  be 
by  grace,"  to  the  end  that  the  promise  of  eternal  life  "might 
be  sure  to  all  the  seed ;"  whether,  by  nature,  Jews  or  Gentiles. 
It  is  througli  faith,  and  not  on  account  of  faith,  as  though  there 
was  in  faith  some  intrinsic  merit. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  if  faith  were  a  work  of  the  head 
or  of  the  heart,  or  of  both,  possessing  inherent  and  essential 
merit,  it  would  be  as  much  a  work  to  be  rewarded  as  any  other 
exercise  of  the  understanding  or  of  the  heart.  Love  is  said 
"to  be  the  fulfilling  of  the  whole  law,"  and  covetousness  is 
called  idolatry.  Were,  then,  justification  to  be  founded  on  faith, 
hope,  or  love,  as  works  of  the  understanding  or  afiections,  it 
could  be  no  more  of  grace  than  any  other  blessing  received  on 
account  of  any  thing  done  by  us  or  wrought  in  us. 

Hence,  in  the  evangelical  dispensation  of  justification,  it  is  in 
some  sense  connected  with  seven  causes.  Paul  affirms,  that  a 
man  is  justified  by  faith:  Rom.  v.  1 ;  Gal.  ii.  16  ;  iii.  24.  In 
the  second  place,  he  states,  that,  "we  are  justified  freely  by  his 
grace :"  Rom.  iii.  24 ;  Titus  iii.  7.  In  the  third  place,  on  an- 
other occasion,  he  teaches  that  "  we  are  justified  by  Christ's 
hlood:"  Rom.  v.  9.  Again,  in  the  fourth  place,  he  says,  that 
"we  are  justified  by  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by  the 
Spirit  of  our  God :"  1  Cor.  vi.  11.  To  the  Galatians,  in  the 
fifth  place,  he  declares,  that  "we  are  justified  by  Christ:"  Gal. 
ii.  16.  In  the  sixth  place,  Isaiah  says,  "we  are  justified  by 
knoivledge:"  Isa.  liii.  11.  And  James,  in  the  seventh  place, 
says,  "we  are  justified  by  works:"  chap.  ii.  21.  Thus,  by  Divine 
authority,  faith  is  connected  as  an  efi'ect,  in  some  sense,  of  seven 
causes,  viz.  Faith,  Grace,  the  Blood  of  Christ,  the  Name  of  the 
Lord,  Knowledge,  Christ,  and  Works.  May  it  not,  then,  be 
asked,  Why  do  so  many  select  one  of  these  only,  as  essential  to 
justification  ?  This  is  one  of  the  evidences  of  the  violence  of 
sectarianism. 

Call  these  causes  or  means  of  justification,  and  they  may  save- 


280  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

rally  indicate  an  influence  or  an  instrumentality  in  the  consum- 
mation of  this  great  act  of  Divine  favour.  He  that  assumes 
any  one  or  two  of  them,  as  the  exclusive  or  one  only  essential 
cause  of  a  sinner's  justification,  acts  arbitrarily  and  hazard- 
ously, rather  than  discreetly  or  according  to  the  oracles  of  God. 
We  choose  rather  to  give  to  them  severally  a  Divine  significance, 
and,  consequently,  a  proper  place  in  the  consummation  of  evan- 
gelical justification.  We  feel  obliged  to  use  the  same  reason 
and  discretion  in  ascertaining  the  developments  of  this  work  of 
Divine  grace,  that  we  may  employ  in  searching  into  the  works 
of  God  in  nature  and  in  moral  government.  How  many  agents 
and  laws  of  nature  co-operate  in  providing  our  daily  bread  ? 
Suns  rise  and  set,  moons  wax  and  wane,  tides  ebb  and  flow,  the 
planets  observe  their  cycles,  morning,  noon,  and  night  perform 
their  functions,  the  clouds  pour  their  treasures  into  the  bosom 
of  the  thirsty  earth,  the  dews  distil  their  freshness  on  the  ten- 
der blade,  and  the  electric  fluid,  unobserved,  in  perpetual  mo- 
tion, as  the  anima  miindi  ministers  to  life  in  every  form  of  vege- 
table, animal,  and  human  existence. 

Why,  then,  to  reason's  ear  should  it  sound  discordant,  or,  to 
reason's  eye  appear  uncouth,  that,  in  the  scheme  of  redemption 
and  regeneration,  God's  instrumentalities  should  be  as  numerous 
and  as  various,  yet  as  co-operative  as  those  in  outward  and  sen- 
Bible  nature? 

Again,  let  us  survey  the  works  of  man  to  man,  his  modes  and 
forms  of  action  in  the  consummation  of  some  grand  scheme  of 
human  benefaction.  Take,  for  example,  that  philanthropist  who, 
standing  on  the  sea-shore,  descries  a  shipwrecked  crew  clinging 
to  a  portion  of  the  wreck,  tossed  to  and  fro  among  the  foaming 
billows  of  an  angry  sea.  He  calls  to  his  son,  and  commands 
him  to  seize  a  boat  and  hasten  to  their  rescue.  He  obeys. 
Cheerfully  he  plies  the  oars,  and  fearlessly  struggles  through 
many  a  conflicting  wave,  till  he  reaches  the  almost  famished 
and  fainting  crew.  He  commands  them  to  seize  his  arm  and  let 
go  the  wreck,  and  he  will  help  them  into  his  boat.  They  obey, 
and,  all  aboard,  he  commands  them  to  grasp  each  his  oar  and 
co-operate  with  him  in  seeking  the  port  of  safety.  They  cheer- 
fully co-operate,  and  are  saved. 

The  spectators  and  the  narrators  of  this  scene  form  and  ex- 
press very  difl"crent  views  of  it.  One  says,  the  perishing  crew 
were  saved  by  a  man  on  the  shore ;  another,  by  his  son ;  an- 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  281 

other,  by  a  "boat ;  another,  by  getting  into  a  boat ;  another,  by 
rowing  themselves  to  shore ;  another,  by  a  favourable  breeze. 

They  all  told  the  truth.  There  is  no  contradiction  in  their 
representations.  But  a  philosopher  says,  they  were  saved  by 
all  these  means  together.     Such  is  the  case  before  us. 

These  means  may  be  regarded  as  causes  co-operating  in  the 
result,  all  necessary,  not  one  of  them  superfluous.  But  some 
one  of  them,  to  one  person ;  another,  to  a  second  person ;  an- 
other, to  a  third  person ;  and  another,  to  a  fourth,  appears  more 
prominent  than  the  others :  consequently,  in  narrating  the  deli- 
verance, he  ascribes  it  mainly  to  that  cause  which,  at  the  time, 
made  the  most  enduring  impression  on  his  own  mind. 

But  the  calm,  contemplative  thinker  thus  arranges  these  con- 
current causes.  The  original  or  moving  cause  was  the  humanity 
and  kindness  of  the  father  that  stood  on  the  shore  and  saw  them 
about  to  perish.  His  son,  who  took  the  boat  and  imperiled  his 
life,  was  the  efficient  or  meritorious  cause.  The  boat  itself  was 
the  instrumental  cause.  The  knowledge  of  their  own  condition 
and  the  kind  invitation  tendered  to  the  sufferers  was  the  dispos- 
ing cause.  Their  consenting  to  the  condition  was  the  formal 
cause.  Their  seizing  the  boat  with  their  hands  and  springing 
into  it  was  the  immediate  cause.  And  their  co-operative  rowing 
to  the  shore  was  the  concurrent  and  effectual  cause  of  their  sal- 
vation. 

Had  any  one  of  the  Apostles  been  accosted  by  captious,  inqui- 
Bitive,  and  speculative  partisans  for  a  reconciliation  of  all  he 
had  said,  or  that  his  fellow-labourers  had  said  in  their  narra- 
tives, or  allusions  to  particular  persons,  scenes,  or  events  hap- 
pening in  his  presence,  or  under  his  administration  of  affairs  ; 
had  he  been  requested  to  explain  and  reconcile  them  with  what 
he,  or  others  of  equal  authority,  had  on  other  occasions  said  or 
written  concerning  them,  doubtless,  in  some  such  way  he  could 
and  would  have  explained  them.  Indeed,  in  the  common  expe- 
rience of  all  courts  of  inquiry,  and  tribunals  of  justice,  where 
numerous  statements  are  made  on  questions  of  facts,  by  a  single 
witness,  and,  still  more,  when  a  plurality  are  examined,  such  di- 
versified representations  are  made  rather  to  the  confirmation  than 
to  the  detriment  or  disparagement  of  the  import  or  the  credi- 
bility of  these  statements.  How  often,  and  by  how  many  ca- 
villers have  the  Four  Gospels  been  subjected  to  such  ordeals,  on 
such  pretences  ?     But  who  has  yet  found  good  reasons  to  dis- 

24* 


282  CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM. 

parage  or  discredit  these  narratives  on  account  of  such  assaults 
or  misunderstandings  ? 

No  question  agitated  since  the  era  of  Protestantism  has  occu- 
pied so  much  attention,  or  concentrated  a  greater  amount  of 
learning  and  research  than  the  question  of  justification  by 
faith;  not,  indeed,  because  of  the  inherent  difficulties  of  the  sub- 
ject, but  because  of  the  defection  and  apostasy  of  the  papal 
hierarchy,  and  the  thick  pall  of  darkness  and  error  with  which 
it  had  enveloped  the  whole  Bible.  One  extreme  generates  an- 
other. Hence  the  terminology  of  the  most  orthodox  schools  on 
this  subject  is  neither  so  scriptural  nor  so  intelligible  as  the 
great  importance  of  the  subject  demands. 

To  harmonize  the  seven  statements  found  in  the  Bible  on  this 
subject,  we  know  no  method  more  rational  or  more  scriptural 
than  that  indicated  in  the  illustration  given.  We  are  pardoned 
and  treated  as  righteous,  or,  in  other  words,  we  are  justified  by 
the  grace  of  God  the  Father,  as  the  original  and  moving  cause ; 
by  Christ  his  Son,  and  by  his  blood  or  sacrifice,  as  the  merito- 
rious cause  ;  by  faith  and  knowledge,  as  instrumental  causes  ;  by 
our  convictions  of  sin  and  penitence,  as  the  disposing  cause ; 
and  by  works,  as  the  concurrent  or  concomitant  cause.  This, 
however,  is  justifying  God  in  justifying  us.  "  You  see,"  said 
the  Apostle  James,  "  how  faith  wrought  by  works,"  in  the  case 
of  Abraham,  when  he  ofi'ered  up  his  son  upon  the  altar ;  "  and 
by  works  his  faith  was  made  perfect."  Indeed,  true  faith  neces- 
sarily works ;  therefore,  a  working  faith  is  the  only  true,  real, 
and  proper  faith  in  Divine  or  human  esteem. 

Faith  without  works  is  no  more  faith  than  a  corpse  is  a  man. 
It  is,  therefore,  aptly,  by  high  authority,  regarded  as  ''dead." 
Faith  alone,  or  faith  without  works,  profits  nothing.  But,  as 
Romanists  taught  works  without  faith,  Protestants  have  some- 
times taught  faith  without  works.  The  latter  quote  Paul,  and 
the  former  quote  James,  as  plenary  authority.  But  the  two 
Apostles  have  fallen  into  bad  hands.  Paul  never  preached  faith 
without  works,  nor  James  Avorks  without  faith.  Between  these 
parties,  the  Apostles  have  been  much  abused. 

Controversies  generate  new  terms  or  affix  new  ideas  to  words. 
The  question  between  Calvin  and  Arminius— or  between  their 
followers,  is  not  the  identical  question  between  Paul  and  the 
Jews,  or  -Tames  and  nominal  Christians. 

The  works  of  the  law,  and  the  works  of  faith  are  as  different 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM^  283 

as  law  and  gospel.  Works,  indeed,  are  to  be  considered  as  the 
imbodiments  of  views,  thoughts,  emotions,  volitions,  and  feel- 
ings. They  are  appreciable  indications  of  the  states  of  the 
mind ;  sensible  exponents  of  the  condition  of  the  inner  man. 
For  example,  he  that  seeks  justification  by  the  works  of  the  law 
is  not  in  a  state  of  mind  to  be  justified  by  the  blood  of  Christ, 
or  by  the  grace  of  God ;  he  is  ignorant  of  himself,  ignorant  of 
God ;  consequently,  too  proud  of  his  powers  to  condescend  to 
be  pardoned  or  justified  by  the  mere  mercy  and  merits  of  an- 
other. Rich,  and  independent  in  his  views  of  himself,  he  cannot 
think  of  being  a  debtor  to  the  worth  and  compassion  of  one 
who  contemplates  him  as  ruined  and  undone  for  ever.  He  is 
too  proud  to  be  vain,  or  too  vain  to  be  proud  of  himself.  In 
either  view,  he  cannot  submit  to  the  righteousness  of  faith.  For 
this  purpose,  Paul  says  of  the  Pharasaic  Jews,  "They,  being 
ignorant  of  God's  righteousness,  and  going  about  to  establish 
their  own  righteousness,  have  not  submitted  themselves  to  the 
righteousness  of  God,"  or  to  that  righteousness  which  God  has 
provided  for  the  ungodly. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  works  of  him  that  is  justified  by  faith 
are  exponents  of  an  essentially  different  state  of  mind.  He  is 
humble,  dependent,  grateful.  Feeling  himself  undone,  ruined, 
a  debtor  without  hope  to  pay,  he  sues  for  mercy,  and  mercy  is 
obtained,  he  is  grateful,  thankful,  and  humble  before  God.  In 
this  view  of  the  matter,  to  justify  a  man  for  any  work  of  which 
he  is  capable,  would  be  to  confirm  him  in  carnality,  selfishness, 
and  pride.  But,  convinced,  humbled,  emptied  of  himself,  and 
learning,  through  faith  in  the  gospel,  that  God  has  provided  a 
ransom  for  the  ruined,  the  wretched,  and  the  undone,  he  gladly 
accepts  pardon  through  sovereign  mercy,  and  humbles  himself 
to  a  state  of  absolute  dependence  on  the  merits  and  mercy  of 
another.  Justification  by  faith  in  Christ  is,  then,  the  imbodi- 
ment  of  views  in  perfect  harmony  with  truth,  with  our  condi- 
tion, with  the  whole  revealed  character  of  God,  and,  necessarily, 
tends  to  humility,  gratitude,  piety,  and  humanity ;  while  justifi- 
cation sought  by  works  as  naturally  tends  to  pride,  ingratitude, 
impiety,  and  inhumanity. 

Such  being  the  true  philosophy  of  justification  by  faith,  and 
of  justification  sought  and  supposed  to  be  obtained  by  works  of 
law,  we  need  not  marvel  that  the  God  of  all  grace,  after  having 
sent  his  Son  into  our  world  to  become  a  sacrifice  for  us — to  die 


2&4  'CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

for  our  sins,  and  to  rise  again  for  our  justification — should  have 
instituted  faith  in  him,  in  his  death,  burial,  and  resurrection, 
as  the  means  of  a  perfect  reconciliation  to  himself,  commanding 
us  not  only  to  cherish  this  faith  in  our  hearts,  but  exhibit  it  by 
a  visible  death  to  sin  ;  a  burial  with  Christ  to  sin,  and  a  rising 
again  to  walk  in  a  new  life,  expressed  and  symbolized  by  an  im- 
mersion in  water  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  as  a  work  of  righteousness,  but  as  a 
mere  confession  of  our  faith  in  what  he  did  for  us,  and  of  our 
fixed  purpose  to  walk  in  him.  Hence,  it  is  the  only  suitable 
institution  to  such  an  indication,  as  being,  not  a  moral  work  of 
righteousness,  but  a  mere  passive  surrendering  of  ourselves  to 
die,  to  be  buried,  and  to  be  raised  again  by  the  merit  and  aid 
of  another. 

Baptism  is,  therefore,  no  work  of  law,  no  moral  duty,  no  moral 
righteousness,  but  a  simple  putting  on  of  Christ  and  placing  our- 
selves wholly  in  his  hand,  and  under  his  guidance.  It  is  an 
open,  sensible,  voluntary  expression  of  our  faith  in  Christ,  a 
visible  imbodiment  of  faith,  to  which,  as  being  thus  perfected, 
the  promise  of  remission  of  sins  is  divinely  annexed.  In  one 
word,  it  is  faith  perfected.  Hence,  when  Paul  exegetically  deve- 
lops its  blessings,  he  says,  "  But  you  are  washed,  but  you  are 
sanctified,  but  you  are  justified  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and  by  the  Spirit  of  our  Lord.''*  Thus,  justification,  sanctifica- 
tion,  and  adoption — the  three  most  precious  gifts  of  the  gospel — 
are  evangelically  connected  with  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  and 
"baptism  into  his  death. 

The  immediate  baptism  of  the  first  converts,  after  faith,  is 
satisfactorily  explained  in  this  view  of  it:  three  thousand  in  one 
day  believed  and  were  baptized.  The  jailer  and  his  family 
were  enlightened,  believed,  and  were  baptized  the  same  hour 
of  the  night.  Paul  himself,  so  soon  as  he  had  recovered  from 
the  influence  of  the  supernatural  brightness  which  deprived 
him  of  sight,  and  before  he  had  eaten  or  drunk  any  thing,  was 
commanded,  without  delay,  to  be  forthwith  baptized.  "  And 
he  arose  and  was  baptized."  Baptism,  with  them,  was  the  per- 
fecting, or  confession,  of  their  faith.  The  Ethiopian  eunuch, 
on  his  journey  in  the  desert,  is  as  striking  an  example  of  this 
as  are  the  cases  named.  It  was  "  putting  on  Christ"  as  their 
righteousness. 

*  Cor.  Yi.  11. 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  285 

Baptism,  without  faith,  is  of  no  value  whatever;  for,  in  truth, 
"baptism  is  but  the  actual  and  symbolic  profession  of  faith.  It 
is  its  legitimate  imbodiment  and  consummation.  And  whatever 
virtue  there  is  in  it,  or  connected  with  it,  is  but  the  virtue  of 
faith  in  the  blood  of  Christ  applied  to  the  conscience  and  to  the 
heart.  The  burial  in  water  is  a  burial  with  Christ  and  in 
Christ.  "  For  in  him  shall  all  the  seed  of  Israel,^'  the  believing 
children  of  Abraham,  "be  justified,^^  and  in  him,  "and  not  in 
themselves,  shall  they  glory."  It  is,  then,  the  sensible  and  ex- 
perimental deliverance  from  both  the  guilt  and  the  pollution  of 
sin;  and  for  this  reason,  or  in  this  view  of  it,  believing  penitents, 
when  inquiring  lohat  tliey  should  do,  were  uniformly  commanded 
by  the  ambassadors  of  Christ  to  be  "  baptized  for  the  remission 
of  sins,''  as  God's  own  way,  under  the  New  Institution,  of  re- 
ceiving sinners  into  favour,  through  the  death,  burial,  and 
resurrection  of  his  Son,  into  whose  name  especially,  as  well  as 
by  whose  mediatorial  authority,  they  were  commanded  to  be, 
on  confession,  buried  in  baptism. 

Salvation,  in  the  aggregate,-is  all  of  grace ;  and  all  the  parts 
of  it  are,  consequently,  gracious.  Nor  do  we,  in  truth,  in  obey- 
ing the  gospel,  or  in  being  buried  in  baptism,  make  void  either 
law  or  gospel,  but  establish  and  confirm  both. 


CHAPTER  III. 

SANCTIFICATION. 


Preface. — In  a  specific,  evangelical  sense,  sanctification  is 
the  act  of  separating  a  person  or  thing  from  a  common  to  a 
special  and  spiritual  use.  In  the  following  chapter  on  Sanctifi- 
cation, we  have  dilated,  in  a  discursive  way,  on  the  whole  sub- 
ject of  spiritual  influence,  in  illumination  and  conversion,  as 
terminating  in  sanctification.  These,  indeed,  are  concurrent 
means  of  self-consecration  and  of  Divine  sanctification  or  sepa- 
ration to  God.  But,  in  strict  reference  to  our  specific  object, 
here,  we  have  only  to  state,  that  the  Christian  is  contemplated, 
not  merely  as  adopted  into  the  family  of  God,  not  merely  as 
pardoned  or  justified,  but,  as  also  sanctified  or  consecrated  to 


286  CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

God,  both  in  state  and  character.  Of  this  separation  or  sancti- 
fication  to  God,  the  Holy  Spirit, — which,  in  the  Christian,  is  the 
Holy  Guest,  commonly  called  the  Holy  Ghost, — is  the  personal 
agent  and  author,  his  word  the  instrument,  and  the  blood  of 
Christ,  apprehended  and  received  by  faith,  the  real,  cleansing, 
purifying  means. 

Holiness  is  literally  separation  from  the  earth  to  God  and 
heaven.  Faith,  therefore,  in  the  unseen,  the  spiritual,  and  the 
heavenly,  is  as  necessary  to  sanctification  as  to  justification, 
pardon,  or  adoption.  We  are  justified  by  faith,  sanctified  by 
faith,  whatever  the  instrument  or  means  may  be ;  whether  the 
word  of  God,  the  blood  of  Christ,  or  the  ordinance  of  baptism. 
The  reason  of  this  is,  that  without  faith  every  man  is  spiritually 
blind,  and  dead  to  the  things  of  God,  of  Christ,  and  heaven. 
Well  has  Paul  defined  it  to  be  the  evidence  or  conviction  of 
things  not  seen,  and,  consequently,  the  confidence  of  things 
hoped  for.  But  faith,  as  James  teaches,  is  perfected  only  by 
obedience.  In  reference  to  this  and  to  our  baptism,  we  are  said 
to  be  washed  or  purified  by  the  bath  of  regeneration,  sometimes 
called  "the  washing  of  the  new  birth,"  and  by  the  "renewal  of 
the  Holy  Spirit." 

In  the  following  essay,  we  have  argued  the  whole  subject  of 
spiritual  influence,  as  understood  and  taught  by  us,  and  as  ter- 
minating in  our  sanctification  and  holiness,  which,  indeed,  ia 
the  glorious  consummation  of  the  whole  Christian  dispensation, 
**ror,  without  holiness,  no  man  shall  see,"  or  enjoy,  "God." 
"Happy  the  pure  in  heart,"  said  the  great  Teacher,  "for  they 
shall  see  God,"  "in  whose  presence  there  is  fulness  of  joy,  and 
at  whose  right  hand  there  are  pleasures  for  evermore." 


On  the  subject  of  spiritual  influence,  there  are  two  extremes 
of  doctrine.  There  is  the  Word  alone  system,  and  there  is  the 
Spirit  alone  system.  I  believe  in  neither.  The  former  is  the 
parent  of  a  cold,  lifeless  rationalism  and  formality.  The  latter 
is,  in  some  temperaments,  the  cause  of  a  wild,  irrepressible  en- 
thusiasm ;  and,  in  other  cases,  of  a  dark,  melancholy  despond- 
ency. With  some,  there  is  a  sort  of  compound  system,  claiming 
both  the  Spirit  and  the  Word — representing  the  naked  Spirit 
of  God  operating  upon  the  naked  soul  of  a  man,  without  anf 
argument  or  motive  interposed,  in  some  mysterious  and  inexpli- 


CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  287 

cable  way — Incubating  the  soul,  quickening,  or  making  it  spiri- 
tually alive,  by  a  direct  and  immediate  contact,  without  the  in- 
tervention of  one  moral  idea  or  impression.  But,  after  this 
creating  act,  there  is  the  bringing  to  bear  upon  it  the  gospel 
revelation,  called  conversion.  Hence,  in  this  school,  regene- 
ration is  the  cause ;  and  conversion,  at  some  future  time,  the 
result  of  that  abstract  operation. 

There  yet  remains  another  school,  which  never  speculatively 
separates  the  Word  and  the  Spirit ;  which,  in  every  case  of  con- 
version, contemplates  them  as  co-operating ;  or,  which  is  the 
game  thing,  conceives  of  the  Spirit  of  God  as  clothed  with  the 
gospel  motives  and  arguments — enlightening,  convincing,  per- 
suading sinners,  and  thus  enabling  them  to  flee  from  the  wrath 
to  come.  In  this  school,  conversion  and  regeneration  are  terms 
indicative  of  a  moral  or  spiritual  change — of  a  change  accom- 
plished through  the  arguments; — the  light,  the  love,  the  grace 
of  God  expressed  and  revealed,  as  well  as  approved  by  the  su- 
pernatural attestations  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  believe,  and 
teach,  that  it  is  the  Spirit  that  quickens,  and  that  the  Word  of 
God — the  Living  Word — is  that  incorruptible  seed  which,  when 
planted  in  the  heart,  vegetates,  and  germinates,  and  grows,  and 
fructifies  into  eternal  life.  They  hold  it  to  be  unscriptural, 
irrational,  unphilosophic  to  discriminate  between  spiritual 
agency  and  instrumentality — between  what  the  Word,  per  se^ 
and  the  Spirit,  per  se,  severally  does,  as  though  they  were  two 
independent  and  wholly  distinct  powers  or  influences.  They 
object  not  to  the  co-operation  of  secondary  causes ;  of  various 
subordinate  instrumentalities  ;  the  ministry  of  men  ;  the  minis- 
try of  angels  ;  the  doctrine  of  special  providences ;  but,  how- 
ever, whenever  the  Word  gets  into  the  heart — the  spiritual  seed 
into  the  moral  nature  of  man,  it  as  naturally,  as  spontaneously 
grows  there  as,  the  sound,  good  corn  when  deposited  in  the 
genial  earth.  It  has  life  in  it ;  and  is,  therefore,  sublimely  and 
divinely  called  "The  Living  and  Effectual  Word." 

I  prefer  the  comparisons  of  the  Great  Teacher.  They  are 
the  most  appropriate.  We  frequently  err  when  handling  these, 
because,  in  our  quest  of  forbidden  knowledge,  we  are  disposed 
to  carry  them  farther  than  he  himself  did.  In  the  opening  pa- 
rable of  the  Gospel  Age — a  parable  placed  first  in  the  synopsis 
of  parables  by  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke — he  thus  compares 
the  Word  of  God  to  seed ;  and,  with  reference  to  this  figure,  he 


288  CONSEQUENTS   OF   BAPTISM. 

compares  the  human  heart  to  soil,  distributed  into  six  varieties: 
the  trodden  pathway,  the  rocky  field,  the  thorny  cliff,  the  rich 
alluvion,  the  better,  and  the  best  of  that.  But  we  are  not  con- 
tent with  that  beautiful  and  instructive  representation  of  the 
philosophy  of  conversion.  AVe  must  transcend  these  limits. 
We  must  explain  the  theory  of  soils.  We  must  even  become 
spiritual  geologists,  and  explore  all  the  strata  of  mother  earth ; 
and,  even  then,  there  yet  remains  an  infinite  series  of  whys  and 
wherefores,  concerning  all  the  reasons  of  things  connected  with 
these  varieties.  These  speculations,  and  the  conflicting  theories 
to  which  they  have  given  birth,  we  will  and  bequeath  to  the 
more  curious  and  speculative,  and  will  farther  premise  some 
things  necessary  to  a  proper  opening  of  the  argument. 

Man,  by  his  fall,  or  apostasy  from  God,  lost  three  things — 
union  with  God,  original  righteousness,  and  original  holiness. 
In  consequence  of  these  tremendous  losses,  he  forfeited  life,  lost 
the  right  of  inheriting  the  earth,  and  became  subject  to  all  the 
physical  evils  of  this  world.  He  is,  therefore,  with  the  earth  on 
which  he  lives,  doomed  to  destruction  ;  meanwhile,  a  remedial 
system  is  introduced,  originating  in  the  free,  sovereign,  and  un- 
merited favour  of  God ;  not,  indeed,  to  restore  man  to  an  Eden 
lost — to  an  inheritance  forfeited — to  a  life  enjoyed  before  his 
alienation  from  his  Divine  Father  and  benefactor.  This  su- 
premely glorious  and  transcendent  scheme  of  almighty  love, 
contemplates  a  nearer,  more  intimate,  and  more  sublime  union 
with  God,  than  that  enjoyed  in  ancient  Paradise — a  union,  too, 
enduring  as  eternity — as  indestructible  as  the  Divine  essence. 
It  bestows  on  man  an  everlasting  righteousness,  a  perfect  holi- 
ness, and  an  enduring  blessedness  in  the  presence  of  God  for 
ever  and  ever. 

To  accomplish  this  a  new  manifestation  of  the  divinity  became 
necessary.  Hence  the  development  of  a  plurality  of  existence  in 
the  Divine  Nature.  The  God  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  is 
the  Lord  Gud  of  the  second.  Light  advances  as  the  pages  of  hu- 
man history  multiply,  until  we  have  God,  the  Word  of  God,  and 
the  Spirit  of  God,  revealed  in  the  law,  the  prophets,  and  the 
Psalms.  But,  it  was  not  until  the  Sun  of  Righteousness  arose — 
till  the  Word  became  incarnate  and  dwelt  among  us — till  we  be- 
held his  glory  as  that  of  an  only  begotten  of  the  Father,  full  of 
grace  and  truth  ;  it  was  not  till  Jesus  of  Nazareth  had  finished 
the  work  of  atonement  on  the  hill  of  Calvary — till  he  had  brought 


CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  289 

life  and  immortality  to  light,  by  his  revival  and  resurrection 
from  the  sealed  sepulchre  of  the  Arimathean  senator ;  it  was  not 
till  he  gave  a  commission  to  convert  the  whole  world,  that  the 
development  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  fully  perfected  and  completed.  Since  the  descent  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  on  the  birth-day  of  Christ's  church — since  the 
glorious  immersion  of  the  three  thousand  triumphs  of  the  memo- 
rable Pentecost,  the  church  has  enjoyed  the  mysterious  and  sub- 
lime light  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as 
one  Divinity,  manifesting  itself  in  these  incomprehensible  rela- 
tions, in  order  to  effect  the  complete  recovery  and  perfect  re- 
demption of  man  from  the  guilt,  the  pollution,  the  power,  and 
the  punishment  of  sin. 

No  one  believes  more  firmly  than  I,  and  no  one,  I  presume, 
endeavours  to  teach  more  distinctly  and  comprehensively  than 
I,  this  mysterious,  sublime,  and  incomprehensible  plurality  and 
unity  in  the  Godhead.  It  is  a  relation  that  may  be  apprehended 
by  all,  though  comprehended  by  none.  It  has  its  insuperable 
necessity  in  the  present  condition  of  the  universe.  Without  it, 
no  one  can  believe  in,  or  be  reconciled  to,  the  remedial  policy, 
as  developed  in  the  apostolic  writings.  And,  indeed,  I  have  no 
more  faith  in  any  man's  profession  of  religion,  than  I  have  in 
the  sincerity  of  Mahomet,  who  does  not  believe  in  the  Father, 
and  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit  as  co-operating  in  the 
illumination,  pardon,  and  sanctification  of  fallen,  sinful,  and  de- 
graded man.  While,  then,  I  repudiate,  with  all  my  heart,  the 
scholastic  jargon  of  the  Arian,  Unitarian,  and  Trinitarian  hy- 
potheses, I  stand  up  before  heaven  and  earth  in  defence  of  the 
sacred  style — in  the  fair,  full,  and  perfect  comprehension  of  all 
its  words  and  sentences,  according  to  the  canons  of  a  sound,  exe- 
getical  interpretation. 

I  COULD  not,  indeed,  esteem  as  of  any  value  the  religion  of 
any  man,  as  respects  the  grand  affair  of  eternal  life,  whose  reli- 
gion is  not  begun,  carried  on,  and  completed  by  the  personal 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Nay,  I  esteem  it  the  peculiar  ex- 
cellence and  glory  of  our  religion,  that  it  is  spiritual ;  that  the 
soul  of  man  is  quickened,  enlightened,  sanctified  and  consoled 
by  the  indwelling  presence  of  the  Spirit  of  the  eternal  God.  But, 
while  avowing  these  my  convictions,  I  have  no  more  fellowship 
with  those  false  and  pernicious  theories  that  confound  the  pecu- 
liar work  of  the  Father  with  that  of  the  Son,  or  with  that  of  the 

25 


290  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

Holy  Spirit,  or  the  work  of  any  of  these  awful  names  with  that 
of  another ;  or  which  represent  our  illumination,  conversion,  and 
Banctification  as  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  without  the  knowledge, 
belief  and  obedience  of  the  gospel,  as  written  by  the  holy  apos- 
tles and  evangelists,  than  I  have  with  the  author  and  finisher  of 
the  book  of  Mormon. 

The  revelation  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  is  not  more 
clear  and  distinct  than  are  the  different  offices  assumed  and  per- 
formed by  these  glorious  and  ineffable  Three  in  the  present 
affairs  of  the  universe.  It  is  true,  so  far  as  unity  of  design  and 
concurrence  of  action  are  contemplated,  they  co-operate  in  every 
work  of  creation,  providence,  and  redemption.  Such  is  the  con- 
currence expressed  by  the  Messiah  in  these  words — "  My  Father 
worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work" — "  I  and  my  Father  are  one'' — 
"  Whatsoever  the  Father  doeth,  the  Son  doeth  likewise :"  but 
not  such  a  concurrence  as  annuls  personality,  impairs  or  inter- 
feres with  the  distinct  offices  of  each  in  the  salvation  of  man. 
For  example :  the  Father  sends  his  Son,  and  not  the  Son  his 
Father.  The  Father  provides  a  body  and  soul  for  his  Son,  and 
not  the  Son  for  his  Father.  The  Son  offers  up  that  body  and 
soul  for  sin,  and  thus  expiates  it,  which  the  Father  does  not,  but 
accepts  it.  The  Father  and  the  Son  send  forth  the  Spirit,  and 
not  the  Spirit  either.  The  Spirit  now  advocates  Christ's  cause, 
and  not  Christ  his  own  cause.  The  Holy  Spirit  now  animates 
the  church  with  his  presence,  and  not  Christ  himself.  He  is 
the  Head  of  the  church,  while  the  Spirit  is  the  heart  of  it.  The 
Father  originates  all,  the  Son  executes  all,  the  Spirit  consum- 
mates all.  Eternal  volition,  design,  and  mission  belong  to  the 
Father  ;  reconciliation  to  the  Son ;  sanctification  to  the  Spirit. 
In  each  of  these  terms  there  are  numerous  terms  and  ideas  of 
subordinate  extent,  to  which  we  cannot  now  advert.  At  present, 
we  consider  the  subject  in  its  general  character,  and  not  in  its 
particular  details. 

In  the  distribution  of  official  agency,  as  it  presents  itself  to  our 
apprehension,  with  reference  to  the  subject  before  us,  we  regard 
the  benevolent  design  and  plan  of  man's  redemption,  as  origi- 
nating in  the  bosom  of  our  Divine  Father  ;  the  atonement,  or 
sacrificial  ransom,  as  the  peculiar  work  of  the  Messiah  ;  and  the 
advocacy  of  his  cause,  in  accomplishing  the  conversion  and  sanc- 
tification of  the  world,  the  peculiar  mission  and  office  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.    Thus,  the  Spirit  is  the  author  of  the  written  Word,  as 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  291 

much  as  Jesus  Christ  is  the  author  of  the  blood  of  atonement. 
The  atoning  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant  is  not  more  pecu- 
liarly the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  than  is  the  Bible  the  immediate 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  inspired  and  dictated  by  him  ;  "for 
holy  men  of  old  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit." 
Now,  as  Jesus,  the  Messiah,  in  the  work  of  mediation,  operates 
through  his  blood;  so  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  his  official  agency, 
operates  through  his  word  and  its  ordinances.  And  thus  we 
have  arrived  at  the  proper  consideration  of  our  proposition,  to 
wit :  In  conversion  and  sanctification,  the  Holy  Spirit  operates 
only  through  the  Word  of  Truth. 

In  how  many  other  ways  the  Spirit  of  God  may  operate  in  na- 
ture, or  in  society,  in  the  way  of  dreams,  visions,  and  miracles, 
comes  not  within  the  premises  contained  in  our  proposition.  To 
what  extent  He  may  operate  in  suggestions,  special  providences, 
or  in  any  other  way,  is  neither  affirmed  nor  denied  in  the  propo- 
sition before  us.  It  has  respect  to  conversion  and  sanctification 
only.  Whatever  ground  is  fairly  covered  by  these  terms,  be- 
longs to  this  discussion.  What  lies  not  within  these  precincts, 
comes  not  now  legitimately  before  us. 

I.  Our  first  argument  in  proof  of  our  proposition  shall  be 
drawn  from  the  constitution  of  the  human  mind. 

That  the  human  mind  has  a  specific  and  well-defined  constitu- 
tion, is  as  evident  as  that  the  body  has  a  peculiar  organization ; 
or  that  the  universe  itself  has  one  grand  code  of  laws  which 
governs  it.  Our  intellectual  and  moral  constitution,  as  well  as 
our  physical,  has  its  peculiar  powers  and  capacities — not  one  of 
which  is  violated  on  the  part  of  its  Creator,  in  our  remedial  ad- 
ministration, any  more  than  are  our  sensitive  and  animal  facul- 
ties destroyed  or  violated  by  the  physician  who  rationally  and 
benevolently  aims  at  our  restoration  to  health  from  some  physi- 
cal malady.  No  new  faculties  are  imparted — no  old  faculty  de- 
stroyed !  They  are  neither  more  nor  less  in  number ;  they  are 
neither  better  nor  worse  in  kind.  Paul  the  apostle  and  Saul  of 
Tarsus  are  the  same  person,  so  far  as  all  the  animal,  intellectual, 
and  moral  powers  are  concerned.  His  mental  and  physical  tem- 
peraments were  just  the  same  after,  as  before  he  became  a  Chris- 
tian. The  Spirit  of  God,  in  effecting  this  great  change,  does  not 
violate,  metamorphose,  or  annihilate  any  power  or  faculty  of  the 
man,  in  making  the  saint.  He  merely  receives  new  ideas,  and 
new  impressions,   and  undergoes  a  great  moral  or  spiritual 


292  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

change — so  that  he  becomes  alive  wherein  he  was  dead,  and 
dead  wherein  he  was  formerly  alive. 

As  the  body  or  outward  man  has  its  peculiar  organization,  so 
has  the  mind.  Both  are  organized  in  perfect  adaptation  to  a 
world  without  us  :  the  one  to  a  world  of  sensible  and  material 
objects,  the  other  to  that  world,  and  to  a  spiritual  system  also, 
with  which  it  is  to  have  spiritual  intimacy  and  communion. 
But  the  mind  is  to  commune  with  its  Creator,  and  its  Creator 
with  it,  through  material  as  well  as  through  spiritual  nature: 
and  for  this  purpose  he  has  endowed  it  with  faculties,  and  the 
body  with  senses,  favourable  to  these  benevolent  designs. 

Now,  as  the  body  has  to  subsist  upon  material  nature,  and 
the  mind  upon  the  spiritual  system,  both  are  so  organized  and 
furnished  as  to  secure  and  assimilate  so  much  of  both  as  are 
necessary  for  this  end.  Thus,  for  example,  the  body  lives, 
moves,  and  has  its  being  in  the  midst  of  matter  from  which  it  is 
to  draw  perpetual  sustenance  and  comfort.  For  doing  this,  it  is 
admirably  fitted  with  an  animal  machinery,  created  for  this  pur- 
pose, without  which  animal  life  would  immediately  become  ex- 
tinct. The  lungs  are  fitted  for  respiration,  and  the  stomach  is 
furnished  with  all  the  powers  necessary  to  the  reception,  diges- 
tion, and  assimilation  of  so  much  material  nature  as  is  necessary 
to  the  healthful,  vigorous,  and  comfortable  subsistence  of  the 
body.  But  nothing  from  without  can  afibrd  it  subsistence  or 
comfort,  but  in  harmony  with  this  organization. 

Man,  then,  has  to  live  by  breathing,  eating,  and  drinking ; 
and,  without  these  operations,  nothing  around  him  can  afibrd 
him  life  and  comfort.  Nothing  of  the  bounties  of  nature  can 
administer  to  his  animal  enjoyments  in  any  other  way.  God, 
then,  feeds  and  sustains  man  in  perfect  harmony  with  this 
organization.  He  neither  dispenses  with  any  of  these  powers 
nor  violates  them,  in  supporting  physical  life  and  comfort. 

Precisely  so  is  it  in  the  spiritual  system.  The  mind  has  its 
powers  of  receiving,  assimilating,  and  enjoying  whatever  is  suit- 
able to  itself,  as  the  body  with  which  it  is  furnished.  While 
imbodied,  it  has  only  its  owirproper  faculties ;  but  it  has,  also, 
organs  and  senses  in  the  body,  by  and  through  which  it  com- 
munes with  matter  and  with  spirit,  with  God,  and  nature,  and 
man  ;  and  through  wliich  they  commune  with  it.  It  receives 
all  the  ideas  of  material  nature  by  outward,  bodily  senses,  with- 
out which  it  could  not  have  one  idea  or  imprcasiou  of  the  extcr- 


CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  293 

nal  universe.  A  blind  man  has  no  idea  of  colours,  nor  a  deaf 
man  of  sounds.  Since  the  world  began,  every  man  sees  by  his 
eyes  and  hears  by  his  ears.  Whatever  knowledge,  therefore,  is 
peculiar  to  any  sense  can  never  be  acquired  by  another.  If  God 
give  sight  to  the  blind,  or  hearing  to  the  deaf,  he  does  it  by  re- 
storing these  senses ;  for,  since  the  world  began,  no  man  has 
ever  seen  by  his  ears  nor  heard  by  his  eyes. 

So  true  it  is,  that  all  our  ideas  of  the  sensible  universe  are  the  re- 
sult of  sensation  and  reflection.  All  the  knowledge  we  have  of  ma- 
terial nature  has  been  acquired  by  the  exercise  of  our  senses  and 
of  our  reason  upon  those  discoveries.  "With  regard  to  the  super- 
natural knowledge,  or  the  knowledge  of  God,  that  comes  wholly 
"  hj  faith,"  and  "faith"  itself  "comes  by  hearing."  This  apho- 
rism is  divine.  Faith  is,  therefore,  a  consequence  of  hearing, 
and  hearing  is  an  effect  of  speaking ;  for,  hearing  comes  by  the 
Word  of  God  spoken,  as  much  as  faith  itself  comes  by  hearing. 
The  intellectual  and  moral  arrangement  is,  therefore — 1.  The 
word  spoken;  2.  Hearing;  3.  Believing;  4.  Feeling;  5.  Doing. 
Such  is  the  constitution  of  the  human  mind — a  constitution 
divine  and  excellent,  adapted  to  man's  position  in  the  universe. 
It  is  never  violated  in  the  moral  government  of  God.  Religious 
action  is  uniformly  the  effect  of  religious  feeling ;  that  is  the 
effect  of  faith ;  that  of  hearing ;  and  that  of  something  spoken 
by  God. 

Now,  as  faith  in  God  is  the  first  principle — the  soul-renewing 
principle  of  religion  ;  as  it  is  the  regenerating,  justifying,  sanc- 
tifying principle, — without  it,  it  is  impossible  to  be  acceptable  to 
God.  With  it,  a  man  is  a  son  of  Abraham,  a  son  of  God  ;  an 
heir  apparent  to  eternal  life — an  everlasting  kingdom. 

And  what  is  Christian  faith  ?  It  is  a  belief  of  testimony.  It 
is  a  persuasion  that  God  is  true  ;  that  the  gospel  is  divine  ;  that 
Qod  is  love  ;  that  Christ's  death  is  the  sinner's  life.  It  is  trust 
in  God.  It  is  a  reliance  upon  his  truth,  his  faithfulness,  his 
power.  It  is  not  merely  a  cold  assent  to  truth,  to  testimony  ; 
but  a  cordial,  joyful  consent  to  it,  and  reception  of  it. 

Still,  it  is  dependent  on  testimony.  No  testimony,  no  faith. 
The  Spirit  of  God  gave  the  testimony  first.  It  bore  witness  to 
Jesus.  It  expected  no  faith  without  something  to  believe. 
Something  to  believe  is  always  presented  to  faith ;  and  that 
something  must  be  heard  before  it  can  be  believed ;  for,  until  it 
is  heard,  it  is  as  though  it  were  not — a  nonentity.    But  it  is  not 

25* 


294  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAFHSM. 

enough  that  it  be  heard  by  the  outward  ear.  God  has  given  to 
every  man  an  inward  as  well  as  an  outward  ear.  The  outward 
recognises  sounds  only  ;  the  inward  recognises  sense.  Faith  is, 
therefore,  impossible  without  language ;  and,  consequently, 
without  the  knowledge  of  language,  and  that  language  under- 
stood. It  is  neither  necessary  nor  possible,  without  language — 
intelligible  language.  An  infant  cannot  have  faith ;  but  it 
needs  neither  faith,  nor  regeneration,  nor  baptism.  It  was  a 
figment  of  St.  Augustine,  adopted  by  Calvin,  propagated  in  his 
Institutes,  and  adopted  by  his  children. 

These  infant  regenerators  are  lame  in  both  limbs  :  in  the 
right  limb  of  faith,  and  in  the  left  limb  of  philosophy.  They 
move  on  crutches,  and  broken  crutches,  too.  They  have  no 
philosophy  of  mind,  or  else  they  abandon  it  in  all  their  theolo- 
gical embarrassments.  They  will  have  infants  regenerated,  and 
souls  morally  dead  quickened  by  a  direct  impulse.  The  Spirit 
of  God  is  supposed  to  incubate  their  souls — to  descend  upon 
them  and  work  a  grace  in  them — a  faith  without  reason,  with- 
out argument,  without  evidence,  without  intelligence,  without 
perception,  without  fear,  hope,  love,  confidence,  or  approbation. 

The  whole  system  of  Calvinism,  of  Arminianism,  is  crazy  just 
at  this  point.  They  build  a  world  upon  the  back  of  a  tortoise  ; 
they  build  palaces  upon  ice,  and  repose  upon  couches  of  ether. 
They  have  not  one  clear  idea  on  the  subject  of  regeneration.  It 
is  to  them  a  mystery — a  cabalistic  word — a  mere  shibboleth. 
The  philosophy  of  mind  is  converted  into  a  heap  of  ruins.  They 
have  the  Spirit  of  God  operating  without  testimony — without 
apprehension  or  comprehension — without  sense,  susceptibility, 
or  feeling:  and  all  this  for  the  sake  of  an  incomprehensible,  un- 
intelligible, and  worse  than  useless  theory.  I,  therefore,  ex 
animo,  repudiate  their  whole  theory  of  mystic  influence,  and 
metaphysical  regeneration,  as  a  vision  of  visions,  a  dream  of 
dreams,  at  war  with  philosophy,  with  the  philosophy  of  mind, 
with  the  Bible,  with  reason,  with  common  sense,  and  with  all 
Christian  experience. 

Aro,  II, — A  second  argument  is  deduced  from  the  fiict,  that 
no  living  man  has  ever  been  heard  of,  and  none  can  now  be 
found,  possessed  of  a  single  conception  of  Christianity,  of  one 
spiritual  thought,  feeling,  or  emotion,  where  the  Bible,  or  some 
tradition  from  it,  has  not  been  before  him.  Where  the  Bible  has 
not  been  sent,  or  its  traditions  developed,  there  is  not  one  single 


CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  295 

spiritual  idea,  word,  or  action.  It  is  all  midniglit — a  gloom 
profound — utter  darkness.  What  stronger  evidence  can  be  ad- 
duced, than  this  most  evident  and  indisputable  fact  ?  It  weighs 
more  than  a  thousand  volumes  of  metaphysical  speculations. 

One  would  most  rationally  conclude,  that,  if  the  Spirit  of  God 
did  anywhere  illuminate  the  human  mind,  or  work  into  the 
heart  the  principle  of  faith  previous  to,  and  independent  of,  any 
knowledge  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  he  would  most  probably  do 
it  in  those  portions  of  the  earth,  and  amid  those  vast  masses  of 
human  kind,  entirely  destitute  of  the  Word  of  Life ;  wholly  igno- 
rant of  the  "only  name  given  under  the  whole  heaven,"  by 
which  any  sinful  man  can  be  saved.  If,  then,  he  has  never 
operated  in  this  way,  where  the  Bible  has  never  gone,  who  can 
prove  that  he  so  operates  here,  where  the  Bible  is  enjoyed  ? 

When,  then,  we  reflect  upon  the  melancholy  fact  so  often 
pressed  upon  the  attention  of  Christendom,  by  her  missionaries 
to  heathen  lands,  that  not  one-third  of  human  kind  enjoy  the 
name  of  Jesus ;  that  six-tenths  or  seven-tenths  of  mankind  are 
wholly  given  up  to  the  most  stupid  idolatries  and  delusions; 
that  pagan  darkness  and  Mohammedan  impostures  cover  the 
fairest  and  largest  portions  of  our  earth,  and  engulf  the  great 
majority  of  our  race  in  the  most  debasing  superstitions — in  the 
grossest  ignorance,  sensuality,  and  vice;  and  that  from  these 
is  withholden  all  spiritual  and  Divine  influence  of  a  regene- 
rating and  salutary  character,  so  far  as  all  documentary  evi- 
dence avoucheth.  If,  then,  indeed,  the  Spirit  of  the  Bible,  the 
Holy  Spirit  of  our  God,  did,  at  all,  travel  out  of  the  record,  and 
work  faith,  or  communicate  intelligence,  without  verbal  testi- 
mony, methinks  this  is  the  proper  field.  And  there  being  no 
evidence  of  his  having  so  done,  is  it  not  a  fact,  as  clear  as  a 
revelation  from  heaven — clear  as  demonstration  itself — that  the 
illuminating,  regenerating,  converting,  sanctifying  influence  of 
the  Spirit  of  Wisdom  and  Revelation  are  not  antecedent  to,  nor 
independent  of,  the  written  oracles  of  that  Spirit  ? 

Arc.  III. — A  third  argument  is  deduced  from  the  fact,  that  no 
one,  professing  to  have  been  the  subject  of  the  illuminating, 
converting,  and  sanctifying  operations  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  can 
ever  express  a  single  right  conception  or  idea  on  the  whole  sub- 
ject of  spiritual  things,  not  already  found  in  the  written  word. 
We  have  been  favoured  with  numerous  revelations  of  the  expe- 
riences of  the  most  spiritually-minded  and  excellent  Christians 


296  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

of  this  our  age.  And,  on  listening  to  them  with  the  strictest 
attention,  marking,  with  all  our  powers  of  discrimination,  every 
idea,  sentiment,  and  expression  as  uttered,  I  have  never  heard 
one  suggestion,  containing  the  feeblest  ray  of  light,  which  was 
not  eighteen  hundred  years  old,  and  already  found  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures — read  of  all  men  who  choose  to  learn  what  the  Spirit 
of  God  has  said  to  saints  and  sinners.  Evident,  then,  it  is, 
from  this  fact,  which,  I  presume,  I  may  also  call  an  incontro- 
vertible fact,  that  no  light  is  communicated  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
in  regenerating  and  converting  men ;  which  is  equivalent  to 
saying,  that,  "in  conversion  and  sanctification,  the  Spirit  of  God 
operates  only  through  the  Word  of  Truth." 

Arg.  IV. — A  fourth  argument  is  derived  from  another  fact, 
which  calls  for  special  consideration  just  at  this  point,  to  wit: 
whatever  is  essential  to  regeneration  in  any  case,  is  essential  to  it 
in  all  cases.  The  change,  called  regeneration,  is  a  specific 
change.  It  consists  of  certain  elements,  and  is  effected  by  a 
special  agency.  If  it  be  a  new  heart  given,  a  new  life  commu- 
nicated, it  is  accomplished  in  all  cases,  as  generation  is,  by  the 
same  agency  and  instrumentality.  If  then,  the  Spirit  of  God, 
without  faith,  without  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel,  in  any  case, 
regenerates  an  individual,  it  does  so  in  all  cases.  But  if  faith 
in  God,  or  a  knowledge  of  Christ,  is  essential  in  one  case,  it  is 
essential  in  every  other  case. 

Now,  this  being  admitted,  as  I  presume  it  will  be,  without 
farther  argument  or  illustration,  follows  it  not,  then,  that  nei- 
ther the  Word  of  God  nor  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  neither  preach- 
ing nor  teaching,  neither  hearing  nor  believing  is  necessary  to 
regeneration,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Protestant  church? 
Inasmuch  as  that  church  of  churches  believes  and  teaches  that 
infants  and  pagans  are  regenerated,  in  some  cases,  without  any 
instrumentality  at  all,  by  the  direct,  naked,  and  abstract  intlu- 
ence  of  the  Spirit  of  God  operating  immediately  upon  their 
souls.  As  this  is  a  most  essential  affair  in  this  discussion,  it  is 
all-important  that  we  deliver  ourselves  in  the  very  words  of  the 
most  orthodox  of  these  churches : — 

"This  effectual  call  is  of  God's  free  and  especial  grace  alone; 
not  from  any  tiling  at  all  foreseen  in  man  :  nor  from  any  power 
or  agency  in  the  creature  co-working  with  his  special  grace,  the 
creature  being  wholly  passive  tliercin ;  being  dead  in  sins  and 
trespasses,  until,  being  quickened  and  renewed  by  the  Uoly 


CONSEQUENTS   Or   BAPTISM.  297 

Spirit,  he  is  thereby  enabled  to  answer  this  call,  and  to  embrace 
the  grace  offered  and  contained  in  it ;  and  that  by  no  less  power 
than  that  which  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead.  Elect  infants, 
dying  in  infancy,  are  regenerated  and  saved  by  Christ  through 
the  Spirit,  who  worketh  when,  and  where,  and  how  he  pleases ; 
so  also  are  other  elect  persons,  who  are  incapable  of  being  out- 
wardly called  by  the  ministry  of  the  word.^^"^ 

Now,  I  ask  of  what  use  is  the  ministry  of  the  AVord  in  any 
case,  so  far  as  regeneration  is  concerned?  This  is  a  point  on 
which  I  am  peculiarly  solicitous  of  illumination.  Surely  faith, 
and  preaching,  and  the  gospel  ministry  are  all  vain  and  useless 
in  making  a  man  a  new  creature,  if  dying  infants  and  untaught 
pagans  may  be  regenerated  by  the  Spirit  alone,  without  faith, 
knowledge,  or  any  illumination  whatever.  Nay,  indeed,  if  my 
position  be  true,  and  true  it  most  assuredly  is,  that  whatever  is 
essential  to  regeneration  in  any  case  is  essential  in  all  cases, 
then,  although  we  have  three  classes  of  subjects,  to  wit,  elect 
infants,  elect  pagans,  and  elect  gospel  hearers,  we  have  for  them 
all  one  and  the  same  species  of  regeneration. 

Miracles  truly  never  cease  on  this  hypothesis:  inasmuch  as 
the  regeneration  of  every  infant  is  a  demonstration  of  a  power 
as  supernatural  as  the  resurrection  of  the  Messiah.  Unfor- 
tunately, however,  this  power  is  not  only  never  displayed  to 
our  conviction  at  the  time,  nor  ever  so  displayed  after  the  event 
as  to  become  an  object  of  perception,  much  less  of  sensible 
demonstration.  If,  indeed,  as  it  sometimes  happens  in  some 
branches  of  this  school,  regeneration  is  not  regarded  as  another 
name  for  conversion  and  sanctification,  but  a  previous  work, 
then  it  will  be  important  that  we  be  enlightened  on  the  question, 
How  long  the  interval  between  regeneration  and  conversion, 
between  regeneration  and  faith,  and  between  regeneration  and 
the  dying  infant's  or  pagan's  exit  ?  For  if  the  interval  be  such 
as  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  conversion  and  sanctification, 
we  should  have  the  startling  fact  promulged,  that  infants,  and 
pagans  too,  dying  regenerate,  enter  heaven  without  being  con- 
verted! Another  curious  question  will  certainly  arise.  Of 
what  use  is  infant  baptism,  according  to  such  a  theory  of  re- 
generation ?  For,  if  elect  infants  are  regenerated  without  know- 
ledge, faith,  repentance,  or  baptism,  and  if  non-elect  infants, 

*  So  speaks  the  Presbyterian  Confession^  chap.  x.  §§  2,  3. 


298  CONSEQUENTS  OF  BAPTISM. 

though  baptized,  are  not  regenerated,  why  have  such  a  war  of 
words  about  a  matter  virtually  worth  nothing  to  the  living  or  to 
the  dead  ? 

Arg.  V. — A  fifth  argument  shall  be  deduced  from  the  Holy 
Spirit's  own  method  of  addressing  unconverted  men;  by  signs 
addressed  to  the  sense,  and  words  to  the  understanding  and 
affections.  The  Messiah  himself,  the  Seventy  Evangelists,  and 
the  Twelve  Apostles  were  accomplished  and  fitted  for  their 
ministry  to  the  world  by  such  inspirations  and  accompanying 
powers  as  human  nature  and  society,  Jewish  and  pagan,  then 
required,  and  I  presume  always  will  require.  They  were  first 
sent  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel;  and  afterwards  the 
Apostles  were  sent  to  the  Gentiles.  Now,  in  seeking  to  regene- 
rate and  save  the  human  family,  they,  divinely  guided,  uttered 
human  words,  and  accompanied  them  with  certain  miracles. 
These  were  the  means  supernaturally  chosen  and  used.  They 
were  certainly  apposite  means ;  appropriate  and  fitted  to  the 
end  proposed  by  the  donor  of  this  intelligence  and  power.  He 
seems  to  have  sought  admission  into  the  hearts  of  the  people 
by  these  glorious  displays  of  Divine  power  presented  to  the  eye, 
and  these  words  of  grace  addressed  to  the  ear.  They  saw  the 
sick  healed,  the  leper  cleansed,  demons  dispossessed,  and  the 
dead  raised;  and,  while  seeing  these  solemn  and  significant 
arguments,  they  heard  words  of  tenderness — words  of  pardon 
and  of  life,  spoken  with  a  divine  earnestness,  with  a  heavenly 
sympathy  and  affection.  Thus  the  Spirit  sought  to  convert 
them.  He  used  means,  rational  means ;  therefore,  we  argue, 
such  means  were  necessary,  and  are  still,  in  certain  modifica- 
tions of  that  same  supernatural  grandeur,  necessary  to  con- 
version and  sanctification.  Signs,  as  Paul  explains  them,  were 
necessary,  not  for  believers,  but  for  unbelievers.  They  were 
necessary  to  faith.  The  miracle  opened  the  heart,  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Lord  entered,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  with  it;  and 
the  work  of  conversion  was  finished. 

Now,  may  we  not  conclude  that  miracles  and  words  are  not 
a  mere  redundancy — a  mere  superfluity?  May  we  not  regard 
them  as  essential  means,  employed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  ac- 
complishing his  work?  It  is,  perhaps,  important  also  to  say, 
that  the  proof  of  a  proposition  is  always  subordinate  in  rank  to 
the  proposition  which  it  proves.  The  life  is  not  in  the  miracle, 
but  in  that  which  the  mii'aclo  proves.     The  grand  proposition 


CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  299 

is,  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,  the  Saviour  of  the 
world.  He  that  believes  this  proposition  is  "begotten  of  God.'' 
It  is  the  "incorruptible  seed."  It  is  the  "living  Word."  It 
abideth  for  ever.  The  church  of  the  Messiah  is  built  upon  it. 
The  promises,  then,  certainly  justify  the  conclusion,  that,  in 
converting  and  sanctifying  the  world,  the  inspired  Apostles  and 
Evangelists  used  means  of  divine  authority;  and  neither  did 
depend  upon,  nor  teach  others  to  depend  upon  any  agency  from 
above,  dispensing  with  such  an  instrumentality. 

Arg.  VI. — A  sixth  argument  is  derived  from  the  name  chosen 
by  the  Messiah  as  the  official  designation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
He  calls  him  the  Pay^acletos,  and  that,  too,  with  a  special  refer- 
ence to  his  new  mission.  This  term,  occurring  some  five  times 
in  the  apostolic  writings,  is,  in  the  common  version,  translated 
both  comforter  and  advocate;  and,  by  Dr.  Campbell,  monitor. 
As  an  official  name,  I  prefer  advocate  to  either  of  the  others.  It 
is  generic,  and  comprehends  them  both.  An  advocate  may  be 
a  monitor,  or  a  comforter ;  but  a  monitor,  or  a  comforter,  is  not 
necessarily  an  advocate.  Now,  as  the  Spirit  is  to  advocate 
Christ's  cause,  he  must  use  means.  Hence,  when  Jesus  gives 
him  the  work  of  conviction,  he  furnishes  him  with  suitable  and 
competent  arguments  to  effect  the  end  of  his  mission.  He  was 
to  convince  the  world  of  sin,  righteousness  and  judgment.  In 
accomplishing  this,  he  was  to  argue  from  three  topics — 1.  The 
unbelief  of  the  world;  2.  Christ's  reception  in  heaven;  3.  The 
dethronement  of  his  great  adversary,  the  Prince  of  this  world. 
Then  the  person,  mission,  and  character  of  the  Messiah  alone 
came  into  his  pleadings.  Jesus  promised  him  the  documents. 
And,  indeed,  the  Four  Evangelists  are  arranged  upon  the  in- 
struction given  by  the  Messiah  to  his  advocate.  In  converting 
men,  the  Spirit,  the  Holy  Advocate,  was  to  speak  of  Jesus. 
Hence,  speaking  of  Jesus  by  the  Spirit,  is  all  that  was  necessary 
to  the  conversion  of  men.  The  official  service  and  work  thus 
assigned  the  Holy  Spirit  is  a  standing  evidence  that,  in  con- 
version, and  sanctification,  he  operates  only  through  the  "Word. 
And,  as  it  has  already  been  shown  conversion  is,  in  all  cases, 
the  same  work,  he  operates  in  this  department  only  by  and 
through  the  Word,  spoken  or  written;  and  neither  physically 
nor  metaphysically. 

Arg.  VII. — A  seventh  argument  shall  be  deduced  from  the 
opening  of  the  commission ;  from  the  gift  of  tongues,  by  which 


300  CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM. 

the  Advocate  commenced  his  operations.  That  the  Messiah  had 
a  commission  for  convincing  and  converting  the  world  has  been 
already  shown.  That  he  was  to  use  arguments  has  been  fully 
proved ;  that  he  was  to  speak  and  work  also ;  that,  by  signs  and 
miracles  he  accompanied  the  Word,  and  made  it  effectual. 
JN'ow,  that  language  is  essential  to  the  completion  of  the  com- 
mission, is  farther  proved  from  the  great  fact,  that  the  first  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  under  the  Messiah's  commission,  was  the 
gift  of  tongues. 

Language,  not  merely  the  various  dialects  of  human  speech, 
but  language  itself— not  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Roman — but  that 
of  which  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Roman  are  mere  dialects,  forms, 
or  modes,  is  essential.  He  gave  the  first,  and  he  gave  the  second. 
He  made  glorious  display  of  the  use  of  language,  of  the  need  of 
tongues,  in  commencing  his  new  work.  He  gave  utterance  ;  for 
utterance  is  his  gift.  So  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  said,  "You 
are  enriched  by  him  in  all  knowledge,  and  in  all  utterance." 
The  day  of  Pentecost  is  the  best  comment  on  this  whole  subject 
of  spiritual  influence  ever  written.  "VVe  have  much  use  for  it  in 
this  discussion.  It  is  just  as  useful  on  the  work  of  the  Spirit, 
as  on  the  genius  and  design  of  baptism. 

It  seldom  occurs  to  us,  that  all  Christendom — the  living  world, 
is  now  indebted  for  the  very  book  that  records  the  name,  and 
embalms  the  memory  of  the  Messiah,  and  for  all  that  is  known 
of  the  Holy  Spirit — for  the  very  language  of  the  new  covenant 
— for  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom — and  for  every  spiritual  idea 
and  conception  of  God,  of  heaven,  of  immortality,  of  our  origin, 
nature,  relations,  obligations,  and  destiny,  to  the  immediate 
agency  of  this  Spirit  of  all  Wisdom  and  Revelation — to  the  gift 
of  tongues,  or  of  language.  Yet,  true  to  the  letter  it  is,  that 
"no  one  could  say  that  Jesus  is  Lord,  but  by  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Some  among  us,  through  the  ignorance  that  is  in  them  on  this 
grand  theme,  ascribe  to  the  human  mind  the  powers  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  They  describe  the  human  mind  as  possessing  some  sort 
of  innate  power  of  originating  spiritual  ideas ;  to  arrive  at  the 
knowledge  of  God  by  the  mere  contemplation  of  nature.  They 
annihilate  the  doctrine  of  the  fall;  of  human  imbecility  and  de- 
pravity, and  adorn  human  reason  with  a  very  splendid  pla- 
giai-ism,  called  natural  religion.  While  at  variance  on  almost 
every  thing  else,  the  mental  pliilosophcr  nmd  the  Deist,  the  Ro- 
manist and  the  Protestant,  the  Calvinist  and  the  Arminiau 


CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM.  SOT 

admirably  coalesce  and  harmonize  in  this  self-congratulatory 
assumption.  They  say,  that  man  can,  by  the  feeble,  glimmering 
rush-light  of  his  own  studies  of  nature,  either  descend  from  his 
a  priori,  or  ascend  from  his  a  posteriori  reasonings  to  God — to 
the  apprehension  of  his  very  being  and  perfections ;  human  re- 
sponsibility, the  soul's  immortality,  and  a  future  state  of  rewards 
and  punishments,  without  the  Bible,  and  without  the  teaching 
of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

We  have  neither  so'  studied  nature  nor  learned  the  Bible. 
We  subscribe  to  Paul's  dogma,  "The  world  by  wisdom  knew 
not  God,"  and  agree  with  him,  that  "  it  is  by  faith,"  and  not  by 
reason,  "we  know  that  the  worlds  were  formed  by  the  Word  of 
God — so  that  things  now  seen  existing  did  not  formerly  exist." 
We,  indeed,  ascribe  all  our  ideas  of  spirit  and  of  a  spiritual  sys- 
tem— our  conceptions  of  God  as  creator — of  creation  itself,  of 
providence,  and  of  redemption,  to  one  and  the  same  Spirit,  and 
to  that  Logos  who,  in  one  form  or  other,  has  been  the  prophet  or 
the  advocate  of  the  Messiah  and  his  cause,  for  some  six  thou- 
sand years. 

We  go  farther.  We  assign  to  the  Spirit  of  all  Wisdom  and 
Revelation  the  origination  of  the  spiritual  language ;  perhaps, 
indeed,  of  all  language.  The  most  enlightened  men,  whether 
pagans,  Jews,  or  Christians,  regard  language  as  a  divine  reve- 
lation— even  that  large  portion  of  it  derived  from  sensible  ob- 
jects. The  philosophers,  from  Plato  down  to  Dr.  Whitby,  have 
claimed  for  the  Supreme  God  this  honour.  They  have  refused 
it  to  either  civilized  or  uncivilized  man — to  all  conventional 
agreement.  They  have  handled,  with  great  effect,  the  plainest 
of  propositions,  that  councils  could  not  be  convened  ;  that  if  they 
had  spontaneously  arisen,  no  motions  could  have  been  made,  no 
debates  commenced  nor  conducted  without  the  use  of  speech. 
Philosophers  assume  that  men  think  in  words,  as  well  as  com- 
municate by  them ;  or,  at  least,  have  some  image  of  the  thing, 
natural  or  artificial,  or  they  cannot  even  think  about  it.  The 
natural  process,  which  can  easily  be  made  intelligible  to  all,  is, 
that  the  thing  is  pre-existent,  the  idea  of  it  next,  and  the  word 
last.  The  line  ascending  is  the  word,  the  idea,  the  thing.  The 
line  descending  is  the  thing,  the  idea,  the  word.  Now,  as  the 
line  descending  is  necessarily  the  first,  we  must,  especially  in 
things  spiritual,  admit  that  the  spiritual  things  could  be  commu- 
nicated to  man  only  by  one  that  comprehends  them,  who  had 

26 


302  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

fieen  them,  and  who  selected  from  the  elements  of  that  language 
first  given  to  man,  when  he  conversed  face  to  face  with  God  in 
Eden,  the  proper  materials  for  words  to  communicate  things 
spiritual.  In  strict  accordance  Avith  this  assumption,  Moses 
teaches  us  that  God  conferred  with  Adam,  and  continued  his 
lessons  until  Adam  was  able  to  give  every  creature  around  him 
a  suitable  name.  That  language  commenced  in  this  way  all  ad- 
mit, from  one  fact,  to  wit:  Every  one  speaks  the  laxguage 
WHICH  he  first  hears.  This  is  his  vernacular.  A  miracle  is 
before  us.  The  first  man  spoke  without  being  spoken  to  ;  else 
God  spoke  to  him.  Either  is  a  miracle :  and  of  the  two,  the  lat- 
ter is  of  the  easiest  credence ;  and,  indeed,  it  is  to  the  faithful 
evidently  true  from  the  words  of  Moses.  With  Plato,  then,  I 
Bay,  that  God  taught  the  primitive  words,  and  from  that,  man 
manufactured  the  derivatives.  With  Newton,  I  say,  God  gave 
man  reason  and  religion  by  giving  him  speech.  With  tradition, 
I  say,  that  the  god  Thath  of  the  Egyptians  is  the  Theos  of  the 
Bible,  and  the  Logos  of  the  New  Testament.  The  Logos  incar- 
nate is  the  Messiah  of  Christianity.  Therefore,  the  Spirit  of 
God,  now  the  Spirit  of  the  Word,  is  the  origin  of  all  spiritual 
words  and  conceptions.  With  Paul,  therefore,  I  say,  "We  speak 
spiritual  things  in  spiritual  words,  or  words  which  the  spirit 
teacheth,  expressing  spiritual  things  in  spiritual  words." 

Arg.  VIII. — An  eighth  argument  may  be  drawn  from  1  Peter  i. 
23,  "  Being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorrupti- 
ble seed,  by  the  Word  of  God  which  liveth  and  abideth  for  ever." 
Now,  as  we  all  remember,  our  Lord  himself  compares  his  Word, 
or  the  Word  of  God,  to  seed  planted  or  sown  ;  and,  under  the 
parable  of  the  sower,  represents  its  various  fortunes,  and  beau- 
tifully teaches  the  true  philosophy  of  conversion  in  the  fact,  that 
the  good  ground  is  the  man  who  ''receives  the  Word  of  God  in  an 
honest  heartJ'  Under  both  metaphors,  drawn  the  one  from  the 
vegetable,  the  other  from  the  animal  kingdom,  the  word  of  God 
is  the  seed,  of  which  we  are  born  again  or  renewed  in  heart  and 
life.  This  Word  of  God  liveth  and  abideth :  for  God  lives  and 
abides  for  ever. 

With  regard  to  the  essentiality  of  the  seed.  We  all  know 
that  in  the  vegetable  kingdom,  without  seed  there  is  no  harvest, 
no  fruit.  And,  as  certain  it  is,  that  wlien  the  Word  of  God  is 
not  first  sown  in  the  lieart,  tliere  can  be  no  regeneration,  or  re- 
newal of  the  spirit,  and,  consequently,  no  fruit  brought  forth 


CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  803 

Tinto  eternal  life.  So  the  metaphors  taken  from  the  animal  and 
vegetable  kingdoms,  teach  the  same  lesson.  But  does  not  the 
mere  fact  that  Peter  says,  "we  are  born  again  of  incorruptible 
seed,"  declare  that  where  this  incorruptible  seed  is  not,  there 
can  be  no  birth ! 

Is  it  necessary  now  to  traverse  the  whole  face  of  nature,  to  ex- 
plore the  whole  kingdom  of  botany,  to  find  a  plant  without  a 
seed,  in  order  to  prove  the  proposition,  that  every  ear  of  corn 
comes  from  one  grain  of  seed  deposited  in  the  earth  ?  No  more  is 
it  essential  to  my  argument,  that  I  should  first  hear  all  the  con- 
versions in  the  world,  before  I  conclude  that  there  is  one  that 
originated  without  the  word  of  God  having  been  first  sown  in 
the  human  heart.  Will  not  all  the  world  believe  me,  that  if  I 
prove  in  one  case  that  without  the  specific  seed, — corn,  wheat, 
&c.,  we  cannot  have  a  crop,  that  it  is  true  in  all  other  cases,  with- 
out a  particular  examination  of  every  alleged  case.  And  from 
every  principle  of  analogy,  if  I  prove  the  Word  in  one  case  of  a 
new  heart  to  be  necessary,  it  needs  not  that  I  prove  it  to  be  so 
in  every  other  heart,  and  in  every  other  case.  The  mere  fact  of 
calling  the  Gospel  the  incorruptible  seed,  is  enough.  Where 
that  seed  is  not,  the  fruit  of  it  cannot  be. 

The  phrase,  "the  incorruptible  seed"  of  any  thing,  indi- 
cates, in  the  ears  of  common  sense,  that  is  essential  to  that 
thing ;  and  if  so,  then  who  can  be  a  Christian  without  being 
born? — and  who  can  be  born  but  according  to  one  uniform  and 
immutable  law  ?  Now,  in  the  theory  we  oppose,  there  is  no  uni- 
formity ;  there  is  a  plurality  of  ways  of  being  born,  which,  to 
my  mind,  is  most  palpably  at  fault  in  every  particular. 

But  I  will  adduce  some  other  testimonies  under  this  head  of 
argument.  We  shall  hear  James  the  apostle,  chapter  i.  18 : 
*'  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  by  the  word  of  truth,  that  we 
should  be  a  kind  of  first  fruits  of  his  creation."  Hence  the 
truth  again  appears  as  an  instrument  of  regeneration.  God's 
will  is  the  origin  of  it ;  his  Spirit  the  eifficient  cause  of  it ;  but 
the  Word  is  the  necessary  instrument  of  it.  By  tlie  Word  of 
Trutli,  then,  we  are  begotten,  and  not  without  it,  according  to 
James.  We  may  add  testimonies  without  increasing  either  au- 
thority or  evidence ;  but,  for  the  sake  of  illustration,  if  not  for 
authority,  we  shall  ofier  a  few  other  testimonies  to  complete  this 
particular  argument.  We  shall  hear  Paul,  as  Sifatlier,  speak  to 
his  sons  in  the  faith  in  Corinth — 1  Cor.  iv.  15  :  "  As  my  beloved 


304  CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

sons  I  warn  you ;  for  though  you  have  ten  thousand  instructors 
in  Christ,  yet  you  have  not  many  fathers  ;  for  in  Christ  Jesus 
have  I  begotten  you  through  the  gospel."  Paul  regards  the  gos- 
pel just  in  the  same  attitude  in  which  James  represents  it.  The 
gospel  is  here  the  seed,  the  instrument  of  the  conversion  of  the 
Corinthians. 

But  the  whole  oracle  of  God  is  unique  on  this  subject.  God 
"  purifies  the  heart  by  faith,"  that  is,  the  truth  believed — not  by 
believing  as  an  act  of  the  mind,  but  by  the  truth  believed,  which 
constitutes  "  the  faith.''  Paul  also  told  the  Thessalonians  that 
God  had,  "  from  the  beginning,  chosen  them  to  salvation  through 
sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth."  Here  again 
the  belief  of  the  truth  is  the  instrument  of  sanctification  and  sal- 
vation. I  shall  conclude  this  little  summary  of  a  portion  of  the 
direct  and  positive  testimony  of  God,  in  proof  of  my  grand  posi- 
tion on  the  Holy  Spirit's  work  of  conversion  and  sanctification, 
by  the  testimony  of  the  Messiah,  in  person :  "  Sanctify  them 
through  thy  truth,  0  Father,  for  thy  AVord  is  the  truth." 
Whether,  then,  we  call  the  truth  the  Word,  the  Word  of  God  the 
gospel,  it  is  called  the  seed,  the  incorruptible  seed  of  the  new 
birth ;  by  which  a  sinner  is  quickened,  begotten,  born,  sancti- 
fied, purified,  and  saved.  I  regard  this  my  eighth  argument  as  a 
host  in  itself — nay,  as  a  solemn,  direct,  and  unequivocal  decla- 
ration of  God,  in  attestation  of  the  entire  truth  and  safety  of  the 
proposition  concerning  both  conversion  and  sanctification.  Still 
I  will  yet  add  other  arguments. 

Arc.  IX. — One  shall  be  based  on  the  special  commission 
given  to  Paul,  as  expounded  by  that  given  to  the  Messiah  him- 
self And  therefore,  we  shall  read  that  to  the  Messiah,  as  in- 
troductory to  that  presented  to  the  apostle  Paul.  "  I  give  thee," 
says  Jehovah,  "  for  a  covenant  of  the  people  ;  for  a  light  of  the 
Gentiles  ;  to  open  the  blind  eyes;  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  from 
the  prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  darkness  out  of  the  prison- 
house."  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me;  because  the 
Lord  has  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings  to  the  meek;  he 
hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  li])crty 
to  the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison  to  them  that  are 
bound ;  to  proclaim  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,  and  tho 
day  of  vengeance  of  our  God  ;  to  comfort  all  that  mourn." 
Isaiah  xlii.  6,  7  ;  Ixi.  1,  2.  We  shall  now  hear  Paul  relate  his 
own,  as  he  had  it  from  the  mouth  of  tho  Lord :  "  I  have  appeared 


CONSEQUENTS  OF  BAPTISM.  305 

unto  thee  for  this  purpose,  to  make  thee  a  minister  and  a  wit- 
ness both  of  these  things  which  thou  hast  seen,  and  of  those 
things  in  the  which  I  will  appear  unto  thee;  delivering  thee 
from  the  people  and  from  the  Gentiles,  unto  whom  now  I  send 
thee — to  open  their  eyes,  to  turn  them  from  darkness  to  light, 
and  from  the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that  they  may  receive 
the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  inheritance  among  them  which  are 
sanctified  by  faith,  that  is  in  me.'^  Here,  then,  we  have  a  full 
development,  in  these  grand  commissions,  of  the  manner  and 
means  employed  in  the  wisdom  and  grace  of  God  in  converting 
and  sanctifying  the  nations  of  the  earth,  through  the  mediation 
of  the  Messiah.  The  most  conspicuous  point,  or  the  chief  means 
stated,  is — that  God  would  use  light,  hnoioledge,  the  gospel,  and 
that  he  would  open  the  eyes  of  men — turning  them  from  dark- 
ness to  light,  and  from  the  kingdom  and  power  of  Satan  to  God. 
God,  then,  who  commanded  light  to  arise  out  of  darkness,  has 
used  moral,  spiritual  light — that  is,  revelation,  the  gospel — as  the 
means  of  conversion  and  sanctification.  Illumination  is,  there- 
fore, an  essential  prerequisite  to  conversion  and  holiness.  With- 
out light  there  is  no  beauty ;  for  in  the  dark,  beauty  and  de- 
formity are  undistinguishable.  "Without  light  there  is  nothing 
amiable,  because  amiability  requires  the  aid  of  light  for  its  ex- 
position, as  much  as  beauty.  The  power  of  Satan  is  in  da7''k- 
ness;  the  power  of  God  is  in  light.  God,  therefore,  works  by 
light ;  and  Satan  by  darkness.  Hence,  in  Paul's  commission,  it 
reads,  "Turn  them  from  darkness  to  light;''  and  the  conse- 
quences will  be,  "  from  the  power  of  Satan  to  God  -,"  and  the  ulti- 
mate effect  will  be  remission  of  sins,  and  an  inheritance  among 
the  sanctified.  After  the  study  of  these,  and  many  such  simi- 
lar documents,  found  in  the  Bible,  I  confess  I  am  wholly  una- 
ble to  conceive  of  a  religion  without  knowledge,  without  faith, 
without  an  apprehension,  an  intelligent,  as  well  as  a  cordial  re- 
ception of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  I  repudiate,  therefore,  with  my 
whole  heart,  a  notion  of  infant,  idiot,  and  pagan  regeneration — • 
this  speculative  conversion,  without  light,  knowledge,  faith,  hope, 
or  love.  It  makes  void  the  whole  moral  machinery  of  the 
Bible,  the  Christian  ministry,  and  the  commission  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  It  is  no  advocate  of  Christ ;  it  is  no  comforter  of  the 
soul,  on  the  hypothesis  of  infant,  and  pagan,  and  idiot  regene- 
ration. 
Arg.  X. —  Whatever  influence  is  ascribed  to  the  Word  of  God  in 


306  CONSEQUENTS   OE  BAPTISM. 

iJie  Sacred  Scriptures,  is  also  ascribed  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  Or 
in  other  words,  what  the  Spirit  of  God  is  at  one  time,  and  in 
one  place,  said  to  do,  is,  at  some  other  time,  or  in  some  other 
place,  ascribed  to  the  Word  of  God.  Hence  I  argue  that  they 
do  not  operate  separately,  but  in  all  cases  conjointly.  We  shall 
give  an  induction  of  a  number  of  cases  in  exemplification  of  the 
fact.  Are  we  said  to  be  enlightened  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ? 
We  are  told  in  another  place,  "The  commandment  of  the  Lord 
is  pure,  enlightening  the  eyes."  Again — "The  entrance  of  thy 
word  giveth  light,  and  makes  the  simple  wise."  Are  we  said 
to  be  converted  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ?  we  hear  the  Prophet  Da- 
vid say,  "The  law  of  the  Lord  is  perfect,  converting  the  soul." 
Are  we  said  to  be  sanctified  through  the  Spirit  of  God  ?  we  hear 
our  Lord  pray  to  his  Father,  "Sanctify  them  through  thy  truth, 
thy  Word  is  the  truth."  Are  we  said  to  be  quickened  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  ?  the  same  is  ascribed  to  the  Word  of  God.  David 
says,  "Thy  Word,  0  Lord,  hath  quickened  me."  " Stay  me  with 
thy  precepts,  thy  statutes  quicken  me."  This  is  one  of  the 
strongest  expressions. 

In  other  forms  of  speech,  the  same  efi'ects  and  influence  are 
ascribed  to  both.  Paul,  in  one  text,  says,  "Be  filled  with  the 
Spirit ;"  and,  when  again  speaking  of  the  same  subject,  in  an- 
other, he  says,  "Let  the  Word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly." 
In  both  cases,  the  precepts  are  to  be  fulfilled  in  the  same 
way,  "  Teaching  and  admonishing  one  another  in  psalms  and 
hymns  and  spiritual  songs,  making  melody  in  your  hearts  to 
the  Lord."  "The  Spirit,"  says  Paul  to  Timothy,  "speaketh 
expressly  that  in  the  latter  days,  some  shall  depart  from  the 
faith."  Again — "  Know  ye,  in  the  last  days,  perilous  times  shall 
come."  Again — Paul  says  he  has  sanctified  the  church,  and 
cleansed  it  with  "a  bath  of  water  and  the  Word."  In  another 
instance,  he  says,  he  hath  saved  us  "with  the  washing  of  re- 
generation and  the  renewal  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Are  we  said 
to  be  "born  of  the  Spirit?"  we  are  also  said  to  be  born  again, 
or  "regenerated  by  the  Word  of  God."  I  might  trace  this  mat- 
ter much  farther ;  but,  I  presume,  as  we  have  touched  upon  the 
most  important  items,  we  have  found  such  an  induction  as  will 
satisfy  tlie  most  scrupulous.  Until  questioned,  I  shall  strongly 
affirm  it  as  a  conclusion  fairly  drawn,  that  whatever  efi'ects  or 
influences  connected  Avith  conversion  and  sanctification  arc,  in 
one  portion  of  Scripture,  assigned  to  the  Word,  arc  ascribed 


CONSEQUENTS   OP   BAPTISM.  307 

also  to  the  Spirit ;  and  so  interchangeably  throughout  both  Tes- 
taments. "Whence  we  conclude,  that  the  Spirit  and  the  Word 
of  God  are  not  separate  and  distinct  kinds  of  power — the  one 
superadded  to  the  other — but  both  acting  conjointly  and  simul- 
taneously in  the  work  of  sanctification  and  salvation. 

Arg.  XI. — An  eleventh  argument  is  deduced  from  the  import- 
ant fact,  that  resisting  the  Word  of  God,  and  resisting  the  Spirit 
of  God,  are  shown  to  be  the  same  thing,  by  very  clear  and  ex- 
plicit testimonies  :  such  as  Stephen,  the  proto-martyr,  when 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and,  indeed,  speaking  as  the  Holy 
Spirit  gave  him  utterance,  in  the  presence  of  the  Sanhedrim, 
said,  "  You  circumcised  in  heart  and  ears,  as  your  fathers  did, 
so  do  you.  You  do  ahuays  resist  the  Holy  Spirit."  What  proof 
does  he  allege  ?  He  adds,  "  As  your  fathers  did,  so  do  you," 
(resist.)  "Which  of  the  prophets  did  they  not  persecute?" 
This,  then,  is  his  proof.  In  persecuting  the  Prophets,  they  re- 
sisted the  Holy  Spirit ;  because  the  words  spoken  by  the  Pro- 
phets were  suggested  by  the  Spirit.  We  are  said  to  resist  a 
person  when  we  resist  his  word.  W^hen,  then,  any  one  resists 
the  words  of  the  Prophets  or  the  Apostles,  he  is  said  by  inspired 
men  to  resist  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  important  fact  should  be 
more  frequently  insisted  on  than  it  is.  Men  should  be  taught, 
that,  in  resisting  the  words  spoken  by  Apostles  and  Prophets, 
they  are,  in  truth,  resisting  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  whom  they 
uttered  those  words.  May  we  not,  then,  consistently  say  with 
Stephen,  that,  when  men  resist  the  Prophets  and  Apostles  in 
their  writings,  and  will  not  submit  to  their  teachings,  they  are 
resisting  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  This  being  admitted,  follows  it  not 
again,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  operates  through  the  truth ;  and 
that  we  are  not  to  suppose  that,  in  conversion  and  sanctifica- 
tion, they  do  operate  separately  and  distinctly  from  each  other  ? 

A  still  more  impressive  instance  of  this  kind  we  find  in  the 
book  of  Nehemiah.  In  his  admirable  prayer,  preserved  in  the 
ninth  chapter,  he  has  two  very  remarkable  expressions  ;  one  in 
the  20th  and  one  in  the  29th  verse.  In  the  former,  when  speak- 
ing of  the  instructions  given  the  Jews  by  Moses,  he  said,  "Thou 
gavest  also  thy  good  Spirit  to  instruct  them ;"  and  in  the  latter, 
he  says,  "Many  years  didst  thou  forbear  them,  and  testifiedst 
against  them  by  thy  Spirit  in  thy  Prophets,  yet  would  they  not 
hear."  Here,  then,  we  are  taught  that  God,  by  his  Spirit,  in 
Moses,  instruct-id  the  Jews  by  his  good  Spirit,  and  that,  in  tes- 


SOS  CONSEQUENTS   OF  BAPTISM. 

tifying  to  them  by  the  Prophets,  God  was  testifying  to  them  T)y 
his  Holy  Spirit.  We  are,  then,  still  more  fully  confirmed  in  the 
conclusion  that  the  Spirit  of  God  operates  through  his  Word, 
and  only  through  his  Word,  in  conversion  and  sanctification  ; 
and  that  the  Word  and  Spirit  of  God,  in  those  spiritual  and 
moral  changes  and  influences  of  which  we  now  speak,  are 
never  to  be  regarded  as  operating  apart ;  that  whatever  is  done 
by  the  Word  of  God,  is  done  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  and  what- 
ever is  done  by  the  Spirit,  is  done  through  the  Truth — and  cer- 
tainly he  can  through  that  instrument  operate  most  powerfully 
on  the  spirit  of  man,  as  all  Christian  experience  and  the  saints 
of  all  time  exhibit. 

Arg.  XII. — A  twelfth  argument  is  deduced  from  the  fact, 
that  God  created  nothing  without  his  Word.  "  He  said.  Let 
there  be  light,  and  there  was  light.'^  "By  faith, ^^  says  Paul, 
**  we  know  that  the  worlds  were  framed  by  the  Word  of  God.'* 
All  the  details  of  the  six  days  show  that  "God  made  all  things 
by  the  Word  of  his  power."  Of  course,  then,  we  have  no  idea 
of  any  new  creation  or  regeneration  without  the  Word  of  God. 
It  is  an  overwhelming  fact,  that  God  does  nothing  in  creation  or 
redemption  without  his  Word.  His  creative  power  has  always 
been  imbodied  in  that  sublime  instrument.  Nay,  it  is  the  sword 
of  the  Spirit.  Still,  there  was,  through  that  Word,  an  Almighty 
power  put  forth,  and  still  there  is  both  in  conversion  and  sancti- 
fication. God  works  mightily  in  the  human  heart  by  his  Word. 
The  heart  of  the  King's  enemies  are  mightily  broken  by  it. 
Hence,  faith  cometh  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  Word  of 
God. 

Indeed,  there  is  much  of  this  wisdom  of  God  apparent  in  the 
fact  that  he  has  chosen  the  term  Logos  to  represent  the  Author 
and  Founder  of  the  Christian  fiiith,  in  its  antecedent  state  of 
existence.  And,  hence,  John  represents  Jesus  Christ  himself 
as  the  Word  of  God  incarnate:  "Now  the  Word  was  made  flesh," 
or  became  flesh,  "and  dwelt  amongst  us."  This  is  a  mysterious 
name.  He  had  a  name  given  him  which  no  one  can  compre- 
hend. His  name  is  the  Word  of  God.  Now,  as  Jesus  Christ 
was  "once  God  manifest  in  Word,"  and  now  God  manifest 
in  flesh,  we  have  reason  to  regard  the  Word  of  God  as  an  imbo- 
dimcnt  of  his  wisdom  and  power.  This,  however,  is  spokeu 
with  a  roferonce  to  the  gospel  Word ;  for  Jesus  Christ  is  both 
the  wisdom  and  iho  power  of  God,  and  so  is  his  gospel  j  because 


CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM.  309 

containing  this  development.  It  is  the  wisdom  and  power  of 
God  unto  salvation,  to  every  one  that  believes  it. 

It  was  not,  however,  in  a  creating  light  alone  that  God  em- 
ployed his  "Word.  Every  work  of  creation  is  represented  as  the 
product  of  his  Word.  He  said,  "Let  there  be  a  firmament  in 
the  midst  of  the  waters,"  and  it  was  so.  Again,  "Let  the  dry 
land  appear,"  and  it  was  so.  "Let  the  earth  bring  forth  grass," 
and  it  was  so.  And,  last  of  all,  "Let  us  make  man  in  our  own 
image,  after  our  likeness,  and  let  them  have  dominion.  So  God 
created  man."  God,  therefore,  made  man  in  his  own  image  by 
his  "Word,  and  he  now  restores  him  to  that  same  image  by  his 
"Word  of  power.  Thus,  we  have  all  the  authority  of  the  Bible 
with  us,  in  our  views  of  spiritual  and  Divine  influence.  A  spi- 
ritual, or  moral,  or  creative  power,  without  the  "Word  of  God,  is 
a  phantom,  a  mere  speculation.  It  receives  no  countenance 
from  the  Bible. 

Arc.  XIIL — The  Lord  has  imbodied  his  "Will  in  his  "Word. 
Now  the  will  of  God  is  another  form  of  his  power.  Divine  vo- 
lition is  Divine  power.  The  "Word  of  God  is  the  Jiat  of  God. 
*^Let  there  6e,"  is  a  mere  volition  expressed.  Indeed,  we  may 
go  farther  and  say,  that  the  Word  of  the  Lord  is  the  Lord  him- 
self. The  word  of  a  king  is  the  king  himself,  so  far  as  autho- 
rity or  power  is  considered.  As  the  Lord  Jesus  is  the  Word  of 
God  incarnate,  so  is  his  Word  an  imbodiment  of  his  power. 
For,  as  Solomon  says,  "AVhere  the  word  of  a  king  is,  there  is 
power ;"  there  is  the  power  of  the  king  himself.  The  Word  of 
God  is,  then,  the  actual  power  of  God.  God  is  a  consuming  fire, 
and  his  "Word  is  as  fire,  and  as  a  hammer  that  breaketh  the 
rocks  to  pieces."  It  should  not,  therefore,  be  thought  strange, 
that  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Spirit  of  God  are  sometimes  re- 
presented as  equi-potent — as  equivalent.  Indeed,  in  all  those 
passages  that  represent  the  Word  and  Spirit  of  God  as  being  the 
causes  of  the  same  efi'ects,  this  equivalency  is  clearly  implied. 
Hence,  while  Peter  says,  "By  the  Word  of  God,  the  heavens 
were  of  old,"  Job  says,  "By  his  Spirit  he  has  garnished  the 
heavens." 

Can  any  one  imagine  what  power  could  have  been  superadded 
to  the  Word  of  God,  that  created  light,  that  made  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  that  made  man  upright  or  lioly.  If  so,  let  him 
explain  what  that  power  could  have  been,  which  was  dis- 
tinct from,  and  attached  to,  or  that  accompanied  that  word  by 


810  CONSEQUENTS   OP  BAPTISM. 

which  all  things  were  created  and  made.  Explain  that  accom- 
;panying  power,  and  I  will  explain  the  accompamjing  spiritual 
or  supernatural  power  in  the  case  of  regeneration  !  You  cannot 
break  a  man  down  by  physical  power.  You  cannot  soften  and 
subdue  the  heart,  as  you  grind  a  rock  to  pieces.  A  superadded 
power  beyond  motive,  is  inconceivable  to  any  mind  accustomed 
to  think  accurately  upon  spiritual  and  mental  operations.  The 
heart  of  man  is  to  be  subdued,  melted,  purified  from  all  its 
hatred  of  God  and  enmity,  by  love ;  by  developments  of  grace, 
and  not  by  any  conceivable  influence  of  a  different  nature.  Hia 
love  is  poured  out  into  our  hearts,  says  Paul,  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  that  is  given  to  us. 

Men  had  better  be  careful  how  they  speak  of,  and  how  they 
treat,  the  word  of  God.  It  will  stand  for  ever.  Till  the  heavens 
pass  away,  not  one  word  shall  fail.  Mountains,  by  the  wasting 
hand  of  time,  may  crumble  down  to  dust — oceans  may  recede 
from  their  ancient  limits — the  heavens  and  the  earth  may  pass 
away — ^but  God's  word  shall  never,  never  pass  away.  It  is 
Ood's  mighty  moral  lever,  by  which  he  raises  man  from  earth 
to  heaven.  It  is  his  almighty,  awful,  sublime,  and  gracious  will, 
imbodied  in  such  a  medium  as  can  enter  the  secret  chambers 
of  the  human  heart  and  conscience,  and  there  stand  up  for  God, 
and  confound  the  sinner  in  his  presence.  The  love  of  God  is 
all  enveloped  in  it,  and  that  is  the  great  secret  of  its  charm — 
the  mystery  of  its  power  to  save.  It  is  love,  and  love  alone, 
that  can  reconcile  the  heart  of  man  to  God.  Now  love  is  a 
matter  of  intelligence — a  matter  that  is  to  be  told,  heard, 
believed,  and  received  by  faith.  "The  power  of  God  to  salva- 
tion" is  the  persuasive  power  of  infinite  and  eternal  love,  and 
not  the  compulsive  and  subduing  power  of  any  force  superadded 
to  it.  The  promise  of  eternal  life  is  itself  a  poAver  of  mighty 
magnitude.  So  are  all  the  promises  that  enter  into  the  Christian 
hope.  These  are  almighty  impulses,  when  understood  and  be- 
lieved upon  the  veracity  and  faithfulness  of  God. 

Arc.  XIV. — There  yet  remains  another  argument,  if  I  may 
so  call  it.  It  is,  indeed,  an  induction  of  every  case  of  conversion 
reported  in  the  inspired  record.  It  is  an  account  of  the  various 
influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  adding  members  to  the  Christian 
church  at  its  very  commencement,  and  to  the  end  of  the  apostolic 
history.     Of  these  I  will  give  a  few  specimens : — 

When  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  from  heaven  on  Pentecost,  it  fell 


CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM.  811 

only  on  "the  one  hundred  and  twenty,"  and  not  upon  the  pro- 
miscuous assembly.  For  the  multitude,  after  the  Spirit's  de- 
scent,  did  still  upbraid  the  disciples  with  drunkenness.  Those 
who  first  received  it  that  day,  preached  by  it  to  the  audience. 
The  thousands  who  heard  ivere  pierced  to  the  heart,  and  yet  had 
not  received  the  Spirit.  They  believed,  and  were  in  agony  of 
fear  and  terror,  but  yet  had  not  received  the  Spirit.  They  asked 
what  they  should  do,  and  yet  had  not  received  it.  Peter  com- 
manded them  to  "Repent  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you, 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit."  Of  course,  then,  they  had  not  yet  received  that 
gift.  They,  however,  gladly  received  his  word,  and  were  baptized. 
We  have,  then,  the  first  three  thousand  converts  regenerated  by 
gladly  receiving  the  Word  and  baptism.  This  is  a  strong  fact 
for  the  first  one  in  my  fourteenth  argument. 

The  second  fact  of  conversion  is  found  Acts  iv.,  and  the  ques- 
tion is,  how  were  they  regenerated  ?  We  shall  read  the  passage : 
"Howbeit,  many  of  them  which  heard  the  Word  believed,  and 
the  number  of  the  men  was  about j/?ye  thousand"  We  are  now 
morally  certain  that  these  five  thousand  were  converted  by  the 
Spirit  only  through  the  AYord.  We  have  already  eight  thousand 
examples  of  our  allegation,  and  not  one  instance  of  one  converted 
without  the  Word. 

Our  third  exemplification  is  found  Acts  v.  14:  "  And  believers 
were  the  more  added  to  the  Lord,  multitudes  of  both  men  and 
women."  Women  are  here  mentioned  as  well  as  men.  We 
have,  then,  got  multitudes  of  both  sexes  to  add,  in  proof  that  the 
Spirit  converted  these,  not  without  the  Word,  but  by  what  they 
saw  and  heard. 

We  shall  find  a  fourth,  example.  Acts  viii.  5,  6,  12.  Philip 
went  to  Samaria  and  preached  Christ  to  them.  "And  when 
they  believed  Philip  preaching  the  things  concerning  the  king- 
dom of  God  and  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  they  were  baptized, 
both  men  and  women."  So  the  Samaritans  were  regenerated 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  faith  in  the  Word,  which  Philip 
preached. 

A^Jifth  example  is  found  in  the  eunuch.  "If  thou  believest 
with  all  thy  heart,  thou  mayest."  He  said:  "I  believe  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God."  Then  he,  too,  was  born  of  the  water, 
and  converted,  not  without  the  Word. 

Paul  furnishes  a  sixth  case.    When  he  had  fallen  to  the  ground, 


312  CONSEQUENTS  OP  BAPTISM. 

he  heard  "a  voice  saying  to  him,  Saul,  Saul,  why  persecutest 
thou  me — I  am  Jesus  whom  thou  persecutest/'  His  case  is 
certainly  one  of  indisputable  certainty.  He  both  saw,  heard, 
and  believed,  and  was  baptized. 

To  these  I  might  add  the  case  of  Eneas,  the  citizens  of  Lydda 
and  Saron,  the  assembly  in  the  house  of  Dorcas,  Cornelius,  and 
his  friends,  Lydia  and  the  jailer,  Dionysius,  Crispus,  the  Corin- 
thians and  the  Ephesians,  &c.  &c.,  as  reported  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles.  In  not  one  of  these  cases  did  the  Holy  Spirit 
operate  without  the  Word,  but  always  through  it.  Of  the  Corin- 
thians, it  was  said,  "And  many  of  the  Corinthians  hearing, 
believed,  and  were  baptized.^'  This  was  true  of  all  that  were 
regenerated  through  the  Spirit,  during  the  ministry  of  the 
Apostles.  Hence,  to  convert  men  by  the  accompanying  in- 
fluence of  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  must  do  what  Paul  commanded 
Timothy — "  Preach  the  Word,  be  instant  in  season  and  out  of 
season.'^  Then,  no  doubt,  many  will  be  enlightened,  renewed, 
sanctified,  and  comforted  by  the  presence  and  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit. 


BOOK   SIXTH, 
i^ebicb)^  of  tije  ^libocates  of  infant  l^aptism* 


CHAPTER  I. 

REVIEW    OF    BISHOP    KEXRICK's    TREATISE. 

The  Roman  Bishop  of  Philadelphia,  in  1843,  published  "A 
Treatise  on  Baptism,  with  an  Exiiortation  to  receive  it,  translated 
from  tlie  ivorks  of  St.  Basil  the  Great,  to  which  is  added  a  Treatise 
on  Confirmation,"  with  the  following  motto:  "Let  a  man  so 
account  of  us  as  of  the  ministers  of  Christ  and  the  ministers  of 
the  mysteries  of  God."  1  Cor.  iv.  1. — "Philadelphia :  M.  Fithian, 
61,  North  Second  Street:  1843." 

In  reviewing  the  arguments  and  apologies  for  infant  baptism 
which  have  fallen  under  our  notice,  we  intended  to  place  the  most 
ancient  and  authoritative  treatise  on  that  subject  first  before  our 
readers ;  that,  in  reviewing  its  strong  points,  we  should  be  relieved 
from  the  labour  of  reviewing  more  modern  treatises,  as  they  are 
generally  but  a  reiteration  or  new  modification  of  those  which 
have  preceded  them.  We  had  then  purpoeed  to  place  the  cele- 
brated work  of  Dr.  Wall,  or  that  of  Peter  Edwards,  as  first  on 
our  table.  But  on  glancing  over  the  works  in  my  library  on 
that  subject,  I  found  the  work  now  before  me,  from  the  pen  of 
a  Roman  Prelate ;  and  although  of  recent  and  contemporaneous 
origin,  containing,  as  it  does,  the  varied  ecclesiastic  learning  of 
the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  Pedobaptist  churches,  so  far  as 
this  rite  is  derived  from  them,  I  concluded  that  popular  judg- 
ment and  popular  taste  would  give  precedence  to  the  Mother 
Church,  and  hear  her  first,  with  all  the  respect  due  to  her  great 
learning  and  hoary  antiquity. 

The  Bishops  of  Rome  have  a  higher  reputation  for  ecclesiastic 
learning  than  even  the  Protestant  Prelates  of  England ;  whether 
deserved  or  not,  I  am  not  appointed  an  arbiter  to  decide  j  but 

27  813 


314  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

think,  at  least,  having  been  the  foster  parents  of  infant  baptism, 
they  are  worthy  of  precedence. 

Now,  although  the  work  before  us  is  of  recent  origin,  we  must 
regard  It  as  better  and  even  more  learned  than  works  of  a 
higher  antiquity;  because,  superadded  to  all  that  Eoman 
Prelates  formerly  knew  on  that  subject  are  the  experience, 
reflections,  and  modern  literature  of  our  contemporary,  Bishop 
Kenrick. 

We  shall,  therefore,  hear  him  in  his  own  language  set  forth 
the  foundation  on  which  he  places  the  institution  of  infant 
baptism ;  and,  for  the  sake  of  future  reference,  arrange  numeri- 
cally his  arguments  in  proof  of  his  position.  First,  then,  we 
shall  hear  from  him  the  doctrine  of  what  he  calls  the  Catholic 
Church — by  which  he  does  not  mean  the  Greek  Catholic  nor  the 
l*rotestant  Catholic,  but  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  "The 
Catholic  Church  holds  that  all  infants  are  capable  of  baptism, 
independently  of  the  piety  or  faith  of  their  parents ;  although 
the  children  of  unbelievers  are  not  to  be  baptized  against  the  will 
of  their  parents,  or  in  circumstances  that  expose  the  sacrament 
to  manifest  profanation."*  The  Calvinistic  or  Presbyterian 
Church,  or  "  Calvin  and  his  followers,  ground  the  practice  of 
baptizing  infants  on  the  principle  that  the  covenant  of  God  is 
with  the  faithful  and  their  posterity ;  whence  they  restrict  it  to' 
the  children  of  believers ;  who,  being  embraced  in  the  covenant, 
have  a  right  to  receive  the  sign  of  association  with  the  visible 
church."t  See  a  discussion  on  Christian  Baptism,  by  W.  L. 
McCalla,  Philadelphia,  1828. 

Concerning  this  Presbyterian  foundation  of  infant  baptism, 
founded  on  a  covenant  with  the  faithful  and  their  posterity,  the 
Bishop  only  says  that  it  is  "gratuitously  supposed,  and  cannot 
be  inferred  from  the  ancient  covenant  with  Abraham  and  his 
seed."  To  which  I  may  add,  that  this  hypothesis  is  suicidal  to 
the  Presbyterian  doctrine  of  election,  or,  if  not,  to  the  church 
itself.  She  maintains  that  the  Christian  ordinances  belong  to 
the  visible  elect  family  or  church  of  God,  and  to  none  else. 
Now,  as  she  does  not  believe  nor  teach  that  the  children  of  even 
believing  parents  are,  as  such,  the  elect  children  of  God,  or  re- 
generated in  fact,  or  in  form,  or  in  profession,  how  can  she  dis- 
pense to  them  the  ordinance  of  Christ,  they  not  belonging  in 


*  I'agc  125,  t  i'ag«  124. 


ADVOCATES   OF   INFANT   BAPTISM.  315 

fact  or  profession  to  the  elect  of  God?  She  never  has  been 
able,  and,  I  predict,  never  will  be  able,  to  reconcile  her  doctrine 
of  election  and  her  doctrine  of  grace  and  the  ordinances  of  grace 
with  her  assumption  of  the  Abrahamic  covenants ;  for  all  the 
children  of  Abraham  were  an  elect  nation  for  the  same  purpose 
— according  to  the  flesh ;  and  neither  infants  nor  adults  were 
required  to  believe  in  any  doctrine  of  grace  in  order  to  circum- 
cision. They  were  circumcised  because  of  fleshly  relation,  and 
not  because  of  any  spiritual  relation  to  God  or  Christ.  But  we 
have  to  do  at  present  with  Bishop  Kenrick,  of  the  Roman  Church 
in  Philadelphia ;  and  now  we  shall  consider  his  proof  of  his 
assumption  that  all  infants,  as  such,  whether  the  offspring  of 
Turk,  Jew,  Infidel,  or  Christian,  are  alike  the  proper  subjects 
of  Christian  baptism.     His  first  is — 

Logical  Argument,  No.  I. — "All  of  us  are  by  nature  children 
of  wrath,  being  stained  by  sin.  Baptism  is  the  laver  wherein 
sin  is  washed  away.     It  must,  then,  be  applicable  to  infants." 

Romantic  logic !  A  syllogism  of  four  or  five  terms,  and  yet 
without  a  middle  term !  Pope  Pius  IX.,  with  all  his  infallibi- 
lity and  liberality,  could  not  consecrate  it  into  a  logical  or  ra- 
tional argument.  It  is  as  if  one  should  argue — "  All  of  us  are 
by  nature  children  of  appetite,  being  impelled  by  hunger.  The 
table  is  the  place  whereat  hunger  is  driven  away  by  those  who 
can  eat.  The  table,  then,  must  be  applicable  to  infants,  whe- 
ther they  can  eat  or  not."  This  is  even  a  better  argument  than 
the  bishop's  syllogism  :  for  that  assumes  that  baptism  is,  with- 
out any  qualification  whatever  on  the  part  of  the  subject,  the 
laver  wherein  sin  is  washed  away  !  But  no  well-informed  man 
does  believe  that.  To  make  his  argument  stand  out  in  all  its 
logical  grandeur,  it  would  read  thus: — "All  of  us  are  by  na- 
ture children  of  wrath,  being  stained  by  sin.  Baptism  is  the 
laver  wherein  the  sin  of  living  men  is  washed  away.  It  must, 
then,  be  applicable  to  infants,  living  or  dead."  But  we  take 
more  interest  in  his  biblical  than  in  his  logical  arguments.  Of 
these  the  first  is — 

Bible  Argument,  No.  I. — "Who,"  says  the  bishop,  "would  ven- 
ture to  deny  that  they  can  be  saved  of  whom  Christ  has  said, 
*  Suffer  little  children  to  come  to  me,  and  forbid  them  not,  for  of 
such  is  the  kingdom  of  God  V  " 


To  this  argument  I  have  four  objections : — 


816  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

1.  It  changes  the  subject  of  discussion.  It  is  baptism,  and  not 
salvation,  for  which  the  bishop  pleads  ;  and  now  he  talks  of  sal- 
vation, and  asks,  *'  Who  can  deny  that  infants  can  be  saved." 

2.  These  children  were  brought  to  the  Messiah,  neither  for 
baptism  nor  for  salvation,  but  for  his  blessing. 

3.  They  were  brought  to  Jesus  before  Christian  baptism  was 
ordained ;  and,  therefore,  their  case  can  have  no  logical  nor 
scriptural  connection  with  baptism. 

4.  Jesus  does  not  say  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  composed 
of  Utile  children;  but  of  such  as  are,  in  some  respects,  like  them. 

The  English  Hexapla,  in  all  its  versions,  even  including  the 
Rheims,  has  "of  such,"  and  not  of  them.  The  late  Polyglot, 
containing  eight  languages,  which  I  have  just  examined,  also 
favours  this  version.  The  French  version  expresses  the  full 
sense  of  them  all.  It  reads  in  Matt.  xix.  13  ;  Mark  x.  14 ;  Luke 
xviii.  15,  Qui  leur  ressemblent.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  of  those 
•who  resemble  them.  There  is  not,  then,  a  single  version  of  the 
New  Testament,  in  either  Bagster's  Hexapla,  or  in  Bagster's 
recent  splendid  Polyglot  Bible,  containing  the  Greek,  Hebrew, 
Latin,  English,  French,  German,  Italian,  and  Spanish  approved 
versions,  that  justifies  the  bishop's  gloss. 

But,  strange  to  tell,  while  the  bishop  makes  original  sin  at 
one  time  a  reason  for  infant  baptism,  he  qviotes  with  approba- 
tion the  Abbot  of  Cluney,  who  wrote  against  Peter  de  Bruis  of 
the  twelfth  century,  pleading  the  innocence  of  children  as  a 
reason  why  they  should  certainly  be  baptized.  The  abbot  asks, 
*' How  will  you  any  longer  repel  innocence  from  Christ?  Will 
you  snatch  children  from  Christ  who  embraces  children  V  Thus 
the  bishop,  in  his  logical  argument,  will  have  original  sin,  and 
now  will  have  their  innocence  a  passport  to  Christian  baptism  I 
Surely,  the  legs  of  the  lame  are  unequal ! 

A  Second  Logical  Argument. — The  bishop  draws  his  second 
logical  argument  from  "all  scriptural  texts  which  speak  of  bap- 
tism as  a  washing,  a  renovation  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  He  says, 
"All  such  texts  warrant  the  baptism  of  inftxnts" — because,  "they 
must  be  washed  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  from  the  hereditary 
defilement."  They,  therefore,  come  forth  from  the  font  purified, 
justified,  sanctified,  having  no  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such 
thing.  This  is  another  new  variety  of  the  syllogism.  If  this 
be  proof,  I  know  not  what  could  not  be  proved  by  putting  a 
ih&refore  after  any  three  assertions. 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT   BAPTISM.  317 

Assertion  1.  All  scriptural  texts  that  speak  of  the  washing  of 
regeneration,  warrant  the  baptism  of  infants. 

Assertion  2.  Because  they  must  be  washed  in  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb  from  hereditary  defilement. 

Assertion  3.  Therefore,  they  come  forth  from  the  font  puri- 
fied, justified,  sanctified,  having  no  spot,  wrinkle,  or  any  such 
thing. 

This  is  another  Romaniia  syllogism,  and  would  be  univer- 
sally smiled  at,  were  it  not  that  it  comes  from  a  Roman  bishop 
in  Philadelphia.  I  have  only  to  say,  that  it  assumes  that  a  few 
drops  of  water  from  the  finger  of  priest  or  layman,  [for  Rome 
admits  of  lay  baptism,)  pronounced  with  the  name  of  "the  Tri- 
nity,'^ is  equal  to  the  blood  of  Christ — nay,  more  than  equal  to 
the  blood  of  Christ:  for  that  blood,  in  its  justifying  power,  re- 
quires faith  on  the  part  of  the  subject ;  but  water  is  so  much 
more  efficacious  that  it  requires  no  faith  whatever  on  the  part 
of  the  subject  of  infant  justification  and  purification. 

Bishop  Kenrick  is,  in  some  respects,  a  candid  man ;  and, 
therefore,  he  reasons  rather  awkwardly ;  for,  at  one  time  his 
candour  must  be  sacrificed  to  his  position  ;  at  another  time,  his 
position  to  his  candour.  I  will  give  two  very  remarkable  proofs 
of  his  candour : — 1st.  Contrary  to  all  my  antagonists,  he  ad- 
mits that  infant  baptism  is  not  commanded  in  the  commission, 
and  cannot  be  legitimately  inferred  from  it — ''Go,  convert  the 
nations,  baptizing  them,"  &c.  Of  both  versions  of  the  commis- 
sion, by  Matthew  and  Mark,  he  observes,  "Whether  infants 
should  be  baptized  cannot  be  inferred  with  certainty  from  the 
words  of  the  commission."  He  then  proceeds  to  answer  the 
question,  "  Why,  then,  baptize  them,  if  the  commission  do  not 
authorize  it?"  He  also  repudiates  the  argument  from  circum- 
cision, and  will  not  use  it,  as  being  unworthy  of  the  Apostles 
to  be  left  to  guess  at  what  they  should  do  while  acting  under  a 
commission  from  the  Lord.  We  shall  hear  him  on  both  these 
points : — 

"But,  then,  it  may  be  asked.  On  what  authority  can  they  be 
baptized  ?  If  the  commission  do  not  regard  them,  they  are  ne- 
cessarily beyond  its  reach,  and  the  attempt  to  baptize  is  an  un- 
authorized measure.  I  care  not  to  answer  with  some  that  the 
term  rendered  'teach^  niay  be  understood  of  making  disciples, 
and  initiating  into  Christ.  Neither  shall  I  allege,  as  a  matter 
of  mere  inference,  the  divine  command  that  each  male  infant, 
27* 


818  REVIEWS   OP    THE 

on  the  eighth  day  after  his  birth,  should  be  circumcised,  and 
thus  incorporated  with  the  people  of  God:  whence,  it  is  said, 
the  Apostles  must  have  understood  that  infants  should  be  ad- 
missible to  the  Christian  rite  which  supersedes  circumcision,  es- 
pecially inasmuch  as  the  children  of  proselytes  are  said  to  have 
been  washed  with  water,  when  their  parents  were  admitted  to  Jew- 
ish privileges.  I  do  not  at  all  allow  that  the  Apostles  were  left 
to  guess  their  Master's  will  from  any  circumstance ;  but  I  main- 
tain that  they  were  instructed  by  Him  in  the  sacred  functions 
entrusted  to  them,  and  were  enlightened  by  the  Holy  Spirit  that 
they  might  not  err.  The  divine  ordinance,  on  this  point,  must 
be  learned  from  their  teaching  and  their  acts,  as  recorded  in 
Scripture,  or,  in  the  want  of  decisive  evidence  of  this  sort,  from 
the  teaching  and  practice  of  the  church  which  they  founded.'' 

This  is  a  very  liberal  and  valuable  surrender.  Half  of  our 
treatises  in  favour  of  infant  baptism  are  made  up  of  assumptions 
connected  with  the  identity  of  covenants,  seals,  and  churches. 
Presbyterians,  of  every  school,  lay  great  stress  on  infant  circum- 
cision as  a  warrant  for  infant  baptism.  But  Bishop  Kenrick, 
not  sworn  to  Calvinism,  is  more  enlarged  in  his  views  of  this 
ancient  institution.  He,  therefore,  will  not  send  the  twelve 
Apostles,  with  Christ's  commission  in  their  hands,  a-begging  for 
instruction  to  Abraham,  Moses,  or  the  Jews,  on  the  subject  of 
preaching  the  gospel  and  baptizing.  He  intimates  a  very  evi- 
dent disagreement  between  his  views  and  those  of  all  the  cham- 
pions of  the  infant  rite  with  whom  I  have  wrestled  on  the 
subjects  of  both  circumcision  and  the  commission.  He  even 
inculpates  either  the  learning  or  the  fidelity  of  RosenmuUer,  on 
the  word  matheteiisate,  found  in  Matt,  xxviii.,  which  means,  says 
he,  to  make  disciples.  RosenmuUer  contends  that  ynallieteusate 
may  be  understood  of  taking  into  the  number  of  followers  of 
Christ  infants,  who  are  afterwards  to  be  instructed.  This  the 
Roman  bishop  repudiates,  saying,  "  I  do  not,  however,  choose  to 
rely  on  this  verbal  criticism,  as  the  most  obvious  meaning  of  the 
term  is  to  instruct  effectually,  so  as  to  bring  over  to  the  number 
of  disciples  and  believers  those  who  were  strangers  to  the  truth. 
It  is  used  of  a  scribe  thoroughly  instructed  in  heavenly  truth, 
matUetciitheis,  Matt.  viii.  52,  and  of  Joseph  of  Arimathca,  who 
was  instructed  by  our  Divine  Master,  and  believed  in  him ; 
Matt,  xxviii.  57.  Protestant  writers  have  been  led  to  forced 
explanations  of  words  of  Scripture  to  sustain  the  principle 
that  all  things  necessary  for  salvation  can  be  proved  from  it." 


ADVOCATES   OF   INFANT   BAPTISM.  319 

iUpon  this  very  just  and  necessary  surrender  of  the  commission, 
our  learned  prelate  takes  occasion  to  descant  upon  the  value  of 
tradition,  and  very  candidly  gives  up  the  whole  scriptural  argu- 
ment for  infant  baptism,  as  imperfect  and  unsatisfactory. 

When  any  one,  on  the  Pedobaptist  ground,  tells  me  that  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  on  this  point,  are  not  ^Hhorouglily  conclusive," 
I  will  concur  with  him  in  another  point,  which  the  bishop  him- 
self seems  also  to  admit,  viz.  that  the  baptizing  of  infants  can- 
not be  '^satisfactorily  vindicated."  Here,  then,  the  door  is 
opened  for  tradition.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that,  in  this  respect, 
the  bishop  displays  more  honesty  than  some  Protestant  Pedo- 
baptists :  for  he  at  once  admits  both  the  need  and  the  import- 
ance of  tradition,  and  openly  quotes,  applies,  and  confides  in 
it ;  whereas,  the  Protestants,  many  of  them  at  least,  verbally 
denounce  and  abjure  tradition ;  and  yet,  after  all,  really  build 
on  it.  Of  this  we  shall,  perhaps,  give  some  proofs  hereafter,  as 
we  have,  alas  !  too  many  of  them.  We  shall  only  farther  quote 
this  passage,  and  allow  it  to  speak  for  itself: — 

"Without  the  aid  of  tradition,  the  practice  of  baptizing  in- 
fants cannot  be  satisfactorily  vindicated,  the  scriptural  proofs 
on  this  point  not  being  thoroughly  conclusive :  yet  we  do  not, 
on  this  account,  neglect  the  arguments  which  it  furnishes,  and 
which  have  considerable  force." 

But  though  unable  to  find  any  rational  or  scriptural  authority 
in  circumcision  or  in  the  commission  for  infant  baptism,  the 
bishop  is  resolved,  if  possible,  to  maintain  it ;  and  seems  with 
fresh  spirit  to  appeal  to  the  households  baptized  by  the  Apos- 
tles. We  shall,  then,  hear  him  on  his  second  scriptural  argu- 
ment:— 

"We  are  challenged  to  show  that  the  Apostles  baptized  in- 
fants. Had  we  a  detailed  enumeration  of  their  ministerial  acts, 
the  challenge  would  be  reasonable  ;  but  the  book  styled  their 
Acts  contains  only  some  of  the  chief  facts  which  marked  the 
origin  and  proved  the  divine  authority  of  the  Christian  church. 
Yet  even  there  it  is  said  that  Lydia  'was  baptized  and  her  house- 
hold,' and  the  jailer  '  was  baptized  and  presently  all  his  family ;' 
and  St.  Paul  testifies  that  he  '  baptized  also  the  household  of  Ste- 
phanas.' It  cannot  indeed  be  proved  that  infants  were  in  these 
families  ;  but  the  presumption  is  that  there  were,  and  the  gene- 
ral expressions  naturally  lead  us  to  consider  the  baptism  of  all 
the  children  as  following  the  conversion  of  the  parent.'' 


820  REVIEWS    OF   THE 

Our  resolute  champion  for  the  infant  rite,  in  his  self-respect 
and  candour,  is,  it  appears,  in  the  end  of  his  enumeration  of 
households  baptized,  constrained  to  give  up  his  own  argument 
deduced  from  them,  and  to  acknowledge  that  an  infant  cannot 
be  found  in  any  one  of  them.  So  these,  too,  are  abandoned,  and 
his  dernier  resort  is  to  tradition — ecclesiastic  tradition.  lie,  of 
course,  desires  to  find  in  the  first  century  or  second  century  some 
case  that  would  favour  the  idea.  Beginning  with  Justin  Mar- 
tyr, who  flourished  about  the  middle  of  it,  and  then  proceeding 
to  Irenaeus,  who  flourished  at  the  end  of  it,  he  cannot  find  a  clear 
allusion  to  it,  much  less  a  positive  proof  of  it ;  for  infant  bap- 
tism is  not  so  much  as  named  in  any  fragment  of  ancient  tradi- 
tion during  the  first  and  second  centuries.  No  living  man  can 
find  any  allusion  to  it,  or  account  of  it,  till  in  the  third  century, 
and  even  then  there  is  little  certain  and  less  indicative  that  it 
had  obtained  in  the  Christian  church  so  called. 

Positive  ordinances  demand  positive  proof  as  certain  as  divine 
ordinances  require  the  proof  of  divine  authority.  But  neither 
he  nor  any  other  man  can,  from  the  oracles  of  God,  or  from 
ecclesiastical  history,  produce  any  direct,  positive  proof,  human 
or  divine,  for  infant  baptism  during  the  first  two  hundred  years 
of  the  Christian  age.  We  shall  hear  the  Prelate  on  this  subject, 
and  then  lay  him  on  our  shelf  jyro  temioore : — 

**  The  ancient  practice  of  baptizing  infimts,  of  which  the  origin 
at  any  period  subsequent  to  the  apostolic  age  cannot  be  pointed 
out,  is  the  strongest  presumptive  evidence  of  their  practice. 

"  St.  Justin  the  Martyr  speaks  of  '  many  persons  of  both 
sexes,  sixty  or  seventy  years  old,  who  from  childhood  had  been 
devoted  to  Christ,  and  persevered  in  virginity  unto  that  age.' 
Although  the  terms  employed  do  not  express  their  bajitism  in 
infancy,  they  certainly  aiford  ground  for  believing  it,  for  their 
early  instruction  in  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  and  their  enrolment 
among  his  disciples,  are  easily  understood  on  this  hypothesis." 

No  positive  or  decisive  evidence,  but  air-built,  conjectural,  and 
fiir-fetched  speculations  as  yet  appear ;  and  doubtless  if  any 
man  could  find  any  thing  better,  a  Roman  bishop  might  ration- 
ally be  expected  to  have  it  in  his  possession.  Meantime,  we  are 
at  present  engaged  with  the  Bible  evidence  and  arguments  de- 
ducible  from  the  Christian  Scriptures  ;  and  having  found,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  bishop,  "no  positive  or  satisfactory  proof,'' 
nothing  "thoroughly  conclusive,"  cither  in  circumcision,  the 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  321 

commission,  or  in  household  baptism — nothing  in  the  form  of 
precept,  example,  or  precedent,  in  any  portion  of  the  canonical 
Scriptures,  we  shall  next  hear  one  of  his  neighbours, — 

Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton,  "  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History 
and  Church  Government,  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Prince- 
ton.    Philadelphia,  1835  :  published  by  J.  AYhetham." 

We  prefer  Miller  to  any  other  American,  or  even  English 
writer,  on  this  subject,  because  of  his  opportunities  and  position 
in  society,  and  because  his  calling  and  profession  make  it  his 
duty  to  be  in  possession  of  all  that  is  written  or  of  value  upon 
the  subject.  It  will,  therefore,  exempt  me  from  the  necessity  of 
reviewing  the  sources  whence  he  has  derived  his  arguments — 
such  as  Wall,  Edwards,  Walker,  Williams,  Parsons,  Evans, 
Wardlaw,  Moore,  Plight,  &c.,  &c.,  and  also  his  own  reasonings 
and  reflections  on  all  the  premises.  The  doctor,  too,  is  as  vene- 
rable for  his  years  as  for  his  learning  ;  and  after  him  we  shall 
find  little  to  interest  us  in  other  writers,  though  courtesy  and 
popular  opinion  may  require  us  to  notice  some  of  them. 

Dr.  Miller  had  the  subject  long  before  his  mind,  and  has 
greatly  concentrated  the  arguments  commonly  used,  besides 
adding  his  own  profound  speculations  on  the  premises.  We 
shall,  therefore,  hear  him  with  attention,  examine  him  with  care, 
and  object  to  his  views  with  all  becoming  candour  and  respect. 
I  have  only  farther  to  premise  a  single  regret  as  to  the  doctor's 
style  of  treating  the  subject.  It  is  not  that  his  style  is  too  ob- 
scure, diffuse,  or  inelegant ;  but  because  it  is  too  dogmatical, 
positive,  and  somewhat  ex-cathedral. 

I  am  sorry  to  have  to  except  to  the  statement  of  the  case  in 
issue,  on  the  very  opening  of  his  first  discourse  on  the  direct 
evidence  in  favour  of  infant  baptism.  He  may,  indeed,  without 
any  evil  intention,  have  done  this;  but  it  is  peculiarly  unfor- 
tunate, for  himself  and  his  reader,  who  are  likely  to  be  deceived 
by  the  error  and  seduced  into  much  false,  or,  at  least,  irrelevant 
reasoning.  His  statement  is  in  the  following  words : — "  It  is  well 
known  that  there  is  a  large  and  respectable  body  of  professing 
Christians  among  us,  who  believe  and  confidently  assert  that 
baptism  ought  to  be  confined  to  adults ;  who  insist  that  when 
professing  Christians  bring  their  infant  offspring  and  dedicate 
them  to  God,  and  receive  for  them  the  washing  of  sacramental 
water  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c.,  &c.,  they  entirely  pervert 


1)22  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

and  misapply  an  important  Christian  ordinance."*  I  have 
placed  certain  words  in  this  quotation  in  italics,  that  the  reader 
may  pause  and  reflect  upon  them,  and  ask  himself^  /*  this  ilic 
true  statement  of  the  controversy?  We  are  free  to  confess  that  it 
is  not  a  true  statement  of  the  case.  There  is  no  denomination 
of  Baptists  in  Christendom,  known  to  me,  that  teaches  that  bap- 
tism ought  to  be  confined  to  adults,  or  that  minors,  or  even 
young  children,  should  be  debarred  from  it.  It  is  not  a  question 
about  adults  and  minors,  adults  or  infants.  I  have  baptized 
many  infants  in  law  and  young  children  in  years,  and  so  I  pre- 
sume have  many  others  technically  called  Immersionists  or  Bap- 
tists. Dr.  Miller  makes  it  a  question  of  years — with  us,  it  is  a 
question  oi  faith.  It  is  not  about  nonage  or  adult  age,  but  about 
intelligence  and  belief.  lie  pleads  for  a  baptism  without  faith 
in  the  subject,  without  the  power  to  make  a  profession  of  it. 
We  argue  for  a  baptism  preceded  by  a  profession  of  faith  on  the 
part  of  the  subject.  This  is  the  real  issue — the  one  assumed  by 
him  is  a  false  issue. 

The  doctor's  statement  is  also  characterized  by  unscriptural 
terms — such  as  "  washing  of  sacramental  water,"  "  dedicate  our 
infant  offspring."  How  can  that  be  "  sacramental  water"  to 
one  ignorant  of  a  sacrament  ?  How  is  baptism  a  sacrament  ? 
Whence  came  these  barbarous  terms  ?  And  how  can  one  be 
washed  with  a  dewdrop  on  the  face,  or  with  a  moistened  finger? 
Does  not  the  doctor  wholly  misconceive  the  ordinance  of  dedi- 
cation ?  Neither  circumcision  among  Jews,  nor  baptism  among 
Christians,  was,  under  any  dispensation,  regarded  or  called 
*'  dedication."  Neither  dedicate  nor  dedication,  though  often  oc- 
curring in  the  Bible,  is  once  found  in  the  sacred  Scriptures  ap- 
plied to  persons,  but  always  to  things.  Can  parents  dedicate 
their  children  to  the  Lord  ?  In  what  way  ?  By  what  au- 
thority ? 

The  dedication  of  children  as  soon  as  born,  is  of  equal  au- 
thority with  the  Roman  custom  of  making  saints  of  very  great 
sinners  so  soon  after  their  death  as  their  fiiults  are  forgotten. 
Can  the  ceremony  of  giving  a  name  to  a  child  change  its  posi- 
tion to  God,  his  church,  or  the  human  race  ?  And  if  so,  by 
what  authority? 

"We  are  bound,"  says  the  doctor,  "to  bring  our  infant  seed 

*  Page  14. 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  323 

in  the  arms  of  faith  and  love,  and  present  them  before  the  Lord, 
in  that  ordinance  which  is  at  once  a  seal  of  God's  covenant  with 
his  people."* 

If  infant  baptism  or  ajBTusion  be  a  seal  of  a  covenant,  where  is 
it  so  stated,  and  what  is  the  covenant  into  which  children  enter, 
and  what  does  baptism  seal  to  them  ?  These  are  questions  which 
Dr.  Miller,  I  am  sure,  never  can  answer  with  any  rational  or 
scriptural  authority.  God  affixes  no  seal  to  blank  covenants, 
nor  to  any  covenant  he  does  not  make  good.  What  do  the  in- 
fant seed  of  Pedobaptists  show  or  possess  of  covenanted  mercies 
not  enjoyed  by  others  ? 

But  the  doctor  says,  "We  have  no  doubt  that  the  visible 
church'^  [who  ever  saw  an  invisible  church?]  "is  made  up  not 
only  of  those  who  personally  profess  the  true  religion,  but  also 
of  their  children.''!  His  reasons  for  his  faith  are — 1st.  ^^  Be- 
cause in  all  Jehovah's  covenants  with  his  professing  people,  from 
the  earliest  ages  and  states  of  society,  their  infant  seed  have  been 
included."    Page  15. 

Query — Are  they  born  into  it,  or  circumcised  into  it,  or  baptized 
into  it?  If  they  are  born  into  it,  then  natural  birth  is  the  door  into 
both  the  church  and  the  world.  They  enter  both  at  once.  But  if 
circumcision  was  the  door,  or  baptism  the  door,  then  Adam,  Abel, 
Enoch,  Noah,  Melchisedec,  nor  any  saint,  for  two  thousand  and 
eighty-three  years,  ever  got  into  the  church.  The  doctor's  hypo- 
thesis is  a  lusus  naturce,  or  a  lusus  mentis,  or  a  rank  delusion. 
Circumcision  was  the  door  into  the  church,  or  it  was  not.  If 
the  door  into  the  church,  then  no  one  entered  it  for  two  thou- 
sand and  eighty-three  years.  If  it  was  not,  then  baptism  being, 
according  to  the  doctor,  its  substitute,  is  not  the  door.  The 
doctor's  logic  or  theology  must  fail,  or,  perhaps,  both,  to  extri- 
cate him  out  of  this  dilemma. 

The  covenants  made  with  Adam,  Noah,  and  one  of  those  made 
with  Abraham,  had  respect  to  their  whole  seed,  good  and  bad. 
But  no  such  covenant  could,  by  any  possibility,  be  an  ecclesiastic 
one,  because  an  ecclesiastic  covenant,  as  the  term  imports,  re- 
spects those  selected,  or  called  out ;  and  a  covenant  that  takes 
all  a  man's  seed,  as  did  that  with  Adam,  Noah,  and  the  covenant 
of  circumcision  made  with  Abraham  twenty-four  years  after  the 
"  covenant  concerning  Christ,"  never  could  be  a  church  cove- 

*  Page  15.  f  ibia. 


324  REVIEWS   OP   THE 

nant.  Hence  the  facts  of  the  Bible,  and  its  technical  terms, 
alike  with  common  sense,  excommunicate  the  doctor's  reason- 
ings beyond  the  pale  of  reason  and  philosophy. 

But  there  is  another  radical  aberration  in  the  Doctor's  mind, 
as  it  appears  to  me,  on  the  subject  of  "covenants  made  with 
professing  people."  If  the  covenant  be  made  with  professing 
people  as  such,  then  they  can  have  no  issue,  no  covenanted  issue, 
I  mean,  but  a  professing  issue.  Hence  the  covenant  with  Abra- 
ham concerning  his  spiritual  seed — a  covenant  made  with  him 
as  a  spiritual  and  not  as  a  natural  father,  twenty-four  years 
before  the  covenant  in  the  flesh,  recognises  no  children  but 
those  of  faith:  so  Paul  taught  me  to  reason  when  he  said — "  If 
you  be  Christ's"  you  Jews  or  Gentiles,  "then  are  you  Abra- 
Jiam's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the  covenant,"  alias,  promise. 
This  settles  the  matter,  as  it  appears  to  me,  till  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. Now,  unless  Dr.  Miller  can  show  that  whether  Christ's 
or  not,  Jews  are  the  seed  of  Abraham  according  to  the  covenant 
before  confirmed  [eis  Christon,)  in  reference  to  Christ,  then  he 
must  acknowledge  that  this  his  fundamental  hypothesis  is  but 
a  brilliant  fancy,  a  splendid  sophism,  playing  round  the  galleries 
of  the  imagination,  but  entering  not  into  the  sanctuary  of  reason 
and  sacred  truth. 

The  second  reason  assigned  in  proof  that  the  visible  church 
is  made  up  of  professors  and  their  fleshly  ofi"spring,  is — "  The 
close  and  endearing  connection  between  parents  and  children," 
— "  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  the  church  membership  of 
the  infant  seed  of  believers."  "  Can  it  be,  my  dear  friends," 
says  the  doctor,  in  arguing  this  case,  "  that  when  the  stem  is 
in  the  church,  the  branch  is  out  of  it  V  If  this  be  not  car- 
nalizing the  church  of  Christ,  I  ask  what  would  constitute  that 
offence  against  him  who  said — "  unless  a  man  be  born  again," 
"born  of  water  and  of  Spirit,"  "born  from  above,"  he  cannot 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  "  If  any  man  be  in  Christ  ho 
is  a  new  creature."  If  the  stem  be  in  the  church,  that  is,  the 
flesh  of  the  parents,  then  the  branch  from  the  flesh  must  also 
be  in  it.  But  if  the  stem  be  the  spirit  or  new  man,  then  the 
branch  cannot  be  the  flesh  of  the  child,  but  its  spirit.  Can  any 
one  imagine  a  greater  confusion  of  ideas  in  the  mind  of  a  learned 
Bago,  than  appears  in  such  reasonings.  It  is  the  perversity  of 
a  fallacious  and  unscriptural  system  that  compels  a  literary 
gentleman,  a  learned  father  in  the  Prcsbyterial  Israel,  to  speak 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  325 

such  incongruous  things.  Again,  if  "the  close  and  endearing 
connection'^  between  parents  and  children  be  a  strong  argument 
that  infants  should  be  baptized  and  brought  in  through  natural 
affection  for  them ;  would  it  not  be  quite  as  good  logic  to  argue 
as  follows? — "The  close  and  endearing  connection"  between 
husband  and  wife,  being  one  flesh,  "is  a  strong  argument  in 
favour  of  the  church  membership  of  the  wife  of  a  Christian 
husband."  And,  in  the  same  bold  style  of  proof,  we  would  ask — ■ 
Can  it  be,  my  dear  friends,  that  when  the  head  is  in  the  church, 
the  body  should  be  out  of  it?  And  is  not  "the  husband  the 
head  over  his  wife  as  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  church  V  If  Mr. 
Miller's  second  argument  be  a  sound  one,  it  will  behove  that, 
owing  to  the  "close  and  endearing  connection  between  husbands 
and  wives,"  when  the  husband  or  the  wife  is  in  the  church,  the 
other  party  ought  to  be  a  church  member  also.  If  Mr.  Miller 
repudiates  this  view,  he  repudiates  his  own  reasoning. 

In  the  present  essay,  we  have  not  space  to  respond  to  the  other 
reasons  which  Dr.  Miller  alleges  in  proof  of  his  favourite  dogma. 
We  must  reserve  the  remainder  of  them  for  another  tract.  The 
elaborate  researches  and  efforts  on  the  part  of  those  learned 
advocates  of  this  ancient  tradition,  furnish  very  strong  argu- 
ments against  their  position.  They  affirm,  in  all  their  standards, 
that  "baptism  is  an  ordinance  of  the  New  Testament  and 
ordained  by  Jesus  Christ"  himself.  Why,  then,  in  the  face  of 
this  very  just  and  correct  annunciation  of  their  faith,  go  to 
Moses  and  Abraham  to  find  a  foundation  for  an  ordinance  of 
Jesus  Christ?  Are  solemn  Christian  ordinances  to  be  established 
by  remote  abstract  and  philosophical  reasonings,  instead  of 
positive  precepts?  Positive  institutions  require  positive  enact- 
ments, and  cannot  be  established  by  mere  inferential  reasonings. 
This  is  an  oracle  as  ancient  as  those  of  sacrifice,  the  altar,  and 
the  priest.  Could  any  one  have  introduced  circumcision  by  in- 
ferential reasoning,  or  change  circumcision  from  blood  to  water, 
from  cutting  the  flesh  to  wetting  the  face?  He  that  believes 
this  will  not  find  it  difficult  to  believe  in  transubstantiation  or 
any  other  metamorphosis  of  Patriarchal,  Jewish,  or  Christian 
institutions. 


326  REVIEWS  OF  THE 


CHAPTER  II. 

REVIEW   OF   DR.  MILLER  OF   PRINCETON. 

Two  of  Dr.  Miller's  reasons  in  favour  of  a  mixed  church — a 
church  composed  of  professors  and  non-professors — of  regenerate 
and  unregenerate  persons — of  voluntary  and  involuntary  mem- 
bers, have  been  considered  and  shown  to  be  naked  assumptions, 
without  any  show  of  scriptural  evidence  or  authority.  We  shall 
now  examine  his  other  reasons  for  infant  church  membership. 

His  third  reason  is — "  The  actual  and  acknowledged  church 
membership  of  infants  under  the  Old  Testament  economy,  is  a  de- 
cisive index  of  the  Divine  will  in  regard  to  this  matter."  Now,  on 
his  own  showing,  the  7ion  actual  and  unacknowledged  church 
membership  of  infants  under  the  Old  Testament  economy,  would 
be  a  decisive  index  of  the  Divine  will  in  regard  to  this  matter. 
Dividing,  then,  the  Old  Testament  economy  into  four  thousand 
years  from  Adam  to  Christ,  we  have  two  periods  of  a  very  dif- 
ferent character.  There  is  a  period  of  2100  years  from  Adam 
to  the  covenant  of  circumcision,  during  which  time  there  was 
not  an  indication  of  infant  church  membership  by  any  kind  of 
right,  title,  or  visible  recognition  whatever.  There  was,  indeed, 
a  period  of  about  1490  years,  in  which  there  was  a  national  in- 
stitution— in  which  was  recognised  a  male  infant  membership, 
and  other  hereditary  honours.  The  mitre,  sceptre,  and  the 
tribeship  honours  were  alike  hereditary  in  this  "  Jewish  national 
church  state."  By  what  new  species  of  logic  and  theology  he 
makes  an  Old  Testament  church  of  four  thousand  years  standing 
a  model  of  a  Christian  church  we  know  not,  especially  as  more 
than  half  that  time  there  was  no  infant  membership  whatever ; 
and  during  the  remainder  of  it,  only  a  male  infant  right  in  a 
national  institution.  But  why  argue  for  one  portion  of  its  male 
hereditary  rights,  and  oppose  another  part  of  it  ?  Why  contend 
for  male  infimt  membership,  and  not  for  male  infant  rights  to 
the  priesthood  and  the  throne  ?  Why  make  the  Old  Testament 
national  institution  a  reason  for  infant  church  membership,  and 
not  also  for  church  rulers,  priests,  and  kings?  Did  not  this 
Old  Testament  church  birthright  make  of  certain  males,  accord- 
ing to  tribes  and  families,  priests  and  kings,  as  well  as  citizens? 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  327 

And  did  it  not  equally  exclude  females  from  them  all  ?  If  there 
be  reason,  or  truth,  or  propriety  in  his  assumptions,  Professor 
Miller  ought  to  have  his  sons  fill  his  chair  theological  and  his 
pulpit  ministerial,  in  virtue  of  his  own  flesh ;  and  also  exclude 
his  infant  daughters  from  membership  in  the  church,  because 
girls,  under  Moses,  had  no  national  birthrights  to  sealing  ordi- 
nances! What  an  unenviable  intellectual  discrimination  do 
these  veteran  defenders  of  Papal  traditions  evince  in  the  defence 
of  infant  church  membership ! 

But  our  learned  professor  affords  many  other  such  instances 
of  his  own  peculiar  logic.  In  the  very  same  chapter,  in  proof 
that  circumcision  sealed  to  infants  spiritual  blessings,  he  alleges 
that  "circumcision  is  expressly  declared,  by  the  inspired  Apostle, 
to  have  been  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith."     Rom.  iv.  11. 

Our  logical  text-books  do  not  afford  a  more  complete  illustra- 
tion of  the  ^'faUacia  accidentis,'^  or  of  the  error  of  affirming  a 
general  or  a  universal  truth  from  an  accidental  or  particular 
case,  than  does  our  zealous  Pedobaptist  present  to  the  literary 
"world  in  his  quotation  of  Eom.  iv.  11.  Paul,  in  this  place,  says 
of  Abraham  that  "he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal 
of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had  before  he  was 
circumcised."  From  which  singular  and  remarkable  case.  Dr. 
Miller  infers  that  circumcision  was  the  seal  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith  to  infants  that  have  no  faith!  If  he  does  not  argue  this, 
I  ask  what  does  he  argue? — !  Can  an  infant,  male  or  female, 
have  a  righteousness  of  faith,  without  having  faith? — !  Must 
not  a  human  being  have  faith  before  he  can  have  its  righteous- 
ness? I  would  ask.  Was  circumcision  to  Ishmael,  or  to  the 
babe  Isaac,  what  it  was  to  Abraham,  who  had  believed  God 
many  years  before  either  of  them  was  born?  But  Paul  calls 
circumcision  the  sign  and  a  seal — not  the  seal.  It  was  to  all 
the  circumcised  infants  a  sign  in  their  flesh  that  they  were  of 
the  blood  of  Abraham ;  but  not  to  any  one  of  them  a  sign  of 
any  faith,  or  righteousness  of  faith — for  they  had  neither  on  the 
eighth  day.  Were  we  allowed  to  suspicion  a  design  to  mislead. 
Dr.  Miller  affords  ample  means  of  making  out  a  very  strong  case 
from  the  liberty  which  he  here  takes  with  ^e  sacred  text.  He 
entirely  changes  the  meaning  of  the  passage  as  read  in  the  com- 
mon New  Testament  and  in  the  original,  by  leaving  out  the 
definite  article  before  faith,  and  again  by  lopping  off  an  entire 
member  of  the  sentence  defining  the  word  faith  in  Paul's  use 


328  REVIEWS   OP   THE 

of  it  here.  This  will  appear  to  all  by  quoting  Pau?s  own  words, 
and  placing  them  in  contrast  with  the  words  that  Dr.  Miller 
puts  into  Paul's  mouth.  Paul's  words  are — "He  received  the 
sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith 
which  he  had  being  yet  uncircumcised."  But  Dr.  Miller  makes 
Paul  say,  "He  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith."  The  doctor  makes  circumcision  in  all 
cases  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith ;  while  Paul  makes  it 
only  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  that  faith  possessed  long 
before  the  date  of  the  covenant  of  circumcision.  Now  I  will 
not,  in  charity,  call  this  a  wilful  handling  of  the  word  of  God 
deceitfully ;  but  will  rather  say  it  is  a  proof  of  the  perversity  of 
prejudice,  or  of  the  blindness  sometimes  accompanying  long 
cherished  errors. 

But  what  makes  this  sophism  still  more  unpardonable  is  the 
fact,  that  Paul,  in  commenting  on  the  case,  alleges  that  it  was 
designed  for  a  very  special  purpose ;  viz.  to  indicate  that  in  the 
gospel  age  Gentiles  without  circumcision  should  equally  enjoy 
with  the  circumcised  all  the  blessings  of  the  Christian  institu- 
tion ;  and,  therefore,  his  having  the  righteousness  of  faith  before 
circumcision,  constitutes  him  the  "father  of  all  them  that  be- 
lieve, though  they  be  not  circumcised  ;'^  and  also,  "  the  father 
of  circumcision  to  them  who  are  not  of  the  circumcision  only, 
but  who  also  walk  in  the  steps  of  that  faith  of  our  father  Abra- 
ham which  he  had  while  uncircumcised."  This  explanation  of 
a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  possessed 
twenty-four  years  before  he  was  circumcised,  leaves  not  the  sha- 
dow of  an  excuse  for  any  man  of  letters  making  that  use  of  it 
probably  adopted,  rather  than  fabricated,  by  Professor  Miller. 

His  fourth  reason  for  infant  membership  is  no  better  than  his 
third.  It  is,  indeed,  less  excusable,  because  it  adds  to  its  logi- 
cal infirmities  a  gratuitous  assertion  concerning  a  concession 
which  it  cannot  prove.  It  reads  thus: — "As  the  infant  seed 
of  the  people  of  God  are  acknowledged,  on  all  hands,  to  have 
been  members  of  the  church  equally  with  their  parents,  under 
the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  so  it  is  equally  certain  that  the 
Church  of  God  is  the  same  in  substance  now  that  it  was  then." 
They  are  not  "acknowledged  on  all  hands  to  have  been  mem- 
bers of  any  church"  for  two  thousand  one  hundred  years ;  and 
not  members  of  a  Church  of  God,  unless  a  nation  be  a  church; 
and  not  then,  unless  inale  infiints  mean  "the  infant  seed  of  tho 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  329 

people  of  God."  Now,  as  these  are  not  certain — nay,  not  true — 
from  his  own  words,  this  argument  is  a  logical  fallacy.  His 
words  are,  ^^It  is  equally  certain  that  ilie  churcli  of  God  is  the 
same  in  substance  now  as  then.'"  That  is — It  is  equally  certain 
as  that  which  is  wholly  uncertain — nay,  contrary  to  the  most 
express  testimony. 

The  evidence  that  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian  church 
are  not  identically  one  and  the  same  in  substance,  spirit,  or  form, 
is,  to  an  unprejudiced  mind,  most  copious,  clear,  and  irrefraga- 
ble.    I  will  give  a  few  proofs  of  it  by  stating  a  iew  facts: — 

1.  The  house  that  Moses  built  and  the  house  that  Clirist  built  are 
spoken  of  as  two,  and  not  as  one  and  the  same.  Paul  to  the  He- 
brews, chap,  iii.,  "Moses  was  faithful  as  a  testimony  of  things  to 
be  spoken"  in  the  gospel  age — faithful  in  God's  house ;  but 
"Christ  as  a  son  over  his  own  house,  whose  house  we  (Chris- 
tians) are.''  Now,  as  Moses  was  born  before  he  built  God's 
house,  so  the  Messiah  was  born  before  he  built  his  own  house. 
They  are,  then,  two  houses,  and  not  one  and  the  same. 

2.  God  promised,  by  Isaiah,  chap,  xxviii.  16,  that  he  would 
build  a  new  house,  or  church,  and  himself  lay  the  foundation 
of  it.  "Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion,  for  a  foundation  stone,  a  tried 
stone,  a  precious  corner  stone,  a  sure  foundation.'^  Of  course, 
Moses  had  not  laid  even  the  foundation  of  the  New  Institution, 
or  Christian  temple. 

3.  Daniel,  chap,  vii.,  also  declares  that,  in  the  days  of  the 
Eoman  Caesars,  "the  God  of  heaven  would  set  up  a  kingdom,'* 
which  would  survive  "all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,  and  stand 
for  ever."  Surely,  that  was  not  the  Jewish  church.  It  had 
been  set  up  long  before. 

4.  Dr.  Miller  will  have  the  Jewish  covenant  and  the  Christian 
covenant  the  same;  whereas,  God  promised  a  new  covenant,  and 
also  told  the  Jews  by  Ezekiel,  chap.  xvi.  61,  that  he  would 
make  a  new  covenant,  and  add,  to  a  portion  of  the  Jews,  the 
Gentiles,  and  form  a  new  community ;  but,  says  he,  ^'Not  by  thy 
covenant;"  yet  Dr.  Miller  affirms  by  one  "and  the  same  precious 
covenant."  He  makes  Jesus  Christ  the  head  of  the  Jewish 
church ;  for,  with  him,  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian 
church  are  identical  throughout.  "The  same  head,  the  same 
precious  covenant,  the  same  great  spiritual  design,  the  same 
atoning  blood,  the  same  sanctifying  Spirit."  Such  are  his  dog- 
mata ;  and  his  illustration  is,  "  It  is  not  more  certain  that  a  man 


830  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

arrived  at  mature  age  is  the  same  individual  that  he  was  when 
an  infant  in  his  mother's  lap,  than  it  is  that  the  church,  in  the 
plenitude  of  her  light  and  privileges,  after  the  coming  of  Christ, 
is  the  same  church  which,  many  centuries  before,  though  with 
a  much  smaller  amount  of  light  and  privilege ;  yet,  as  we  are 
expressly  told  in  the  New  Testament,  (Acts  vii.  28,)  enjoyed 
the  presence  and  guidance  of  his  Divine  Head  in  the  wilder- 
ness/' P.  19.  The  illustration  is  much  better  than  the  proof. 
It  is  certain  that  the  infant  and  the  full-grown  man  are  identi- 
cally the  same  person ;  for,  of  this,  consciousness  is  the  highest 
proof.  But  has  the  Christian  church  this  consciousness  ?  Nay ; 
Dr.  Miller  gives  that  up  ;  and  proves  his  allegata  by  simply 
affirming  here,  that  the  Christian  church  is  identically  the  Jew- 
ish church,  full-grown ;  because  the  Jewish  church  enjoyed,  ac- 
cording to  Stephen,  "the  presence  and  guidance  of  her  Divine 
Head."  Suppose  it  should  be  said,  for  illustration  of  this  splen- 
did logic,  that  George  Washington  was  both  the  head  of  the 
American  army  and  afterwards  the  head  of  the  American  na- 
tion— that,  therefore,  the  American  army  and  the  American 
nation  were  identically  one  and  the  same  institution  or  body 
corporate ;  what  would  our  political  doctors  say  ?  Yet,  just 
such  a  logician  is  this  venerable  theological  professor  of  Prince- 
ton. 

To  illustrate  or  argue  the  identity,  the  doctor  proceeds  into 
the  Galatians,  and  brings  up  the  fourth  chapter  to  sustain  his 
notion  of  identity.  Because  an  heir,  when  a  minor,  is  under  a 
master  as  much  as  a  servant,  therefore  the  Jewish  community 
and  the  Christian  community  are  identically  one  church.  Now, 
the  Apostle's  own  argument  in  that  chapter  most  expressly 
compares  the  Jewish  covenant  and  people  to  Hagar  and  Ish- 
mael,  and  the  Christian  covenant  and  people  to  Sarah  and 
Isaac — saying,  that  the  two  women  represent  two  covenants,  or 
constitutions,  and  that  the  two  sons  represent  two  distinct  com- 
munities— the  Jews  and  the  Christians.  The  difference  between 
the  Jewish  community  and  the  Christian  institution  was  never 
more  circumstantially  drawn  by  the  Apostle  Paul,  or  any  one 
else,  than  in  this  graphic  allegory.  Here  is  the  slave  Hagar 
and  her  bond-son,  and  here  is  the  free  Sarah  and  her  free-born 
son.  Here  are  the  Jews,  born  after  the  flesh,  and  the  Chris- 
tians, after  the  Spirit.  The  Jewish  institution,  in  the  birth  of 
its   members,  differed   nothing   from  England   or   the  United 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT   BAPTISM.  831 

States — the  door  into  both  was  flesh,  blood,  or  natural  birth ; 
but,  into  Christ's  church  none  can  enter,  unless,  like  Isaac,  they 
are  supernaturally  born,  or  born  after  the  Spirit.  So  the  Apos- 
tle argues :  "  Cast  out  the  bond-woman  Hagar  and  her  son  Ish- 
mael — both  the  old  covenant  and  those  born  under  it ;  for  the 
son  of  the  bondwoman  shall  not  inherit  with  the  son  of  the  free 
woman."  Dr.  Miller  says  they  are  identically  the  same,  and  do 
inherit  the  same  relation.  But  Paul  differs  from  the  doctor ; 
averring,  *'So  we,  brethren,  are  not  children  of  the  bondwoman'' 
— of  the  Jewish  covenant ;  for  these  two  women  represent  the 
two  covenants;  but  we  Christians  are  "children  of  the  free- 
woman,"  or  new  covenant. 

It  will  not  help  the  doctor,  to  assume  that  the  dispensations 
are  two  and  the  covenants  one,  since  Paul  makes  two  covenants. 
Indeed,  this  whole  hypothesis  of  two  dispensations  of  one  cove- 
nant, is  but  dust  and  ashes  thrown  by  the  theological  doctors 
into  the  eyes  of  their  too  credulous  devotees.  Two  dispensa- 
tions of  religion  change  membership  and  privileges  just  as  much 
as  two  covenants.  A  covenant  is  a  dispensation.  There  is, 
therefore,  just  as  much  sound  sense  as  sound  theology  in  speak- 
ing of  two  dispensations  of  one  dispensation,  as  in  speaking  of 
two  dispensations  of  one  covenant.  It  is  learned  nonsense.  A 
modest  theologian  would,  methinks,  be  satisfied  with  the  fact 
that  the  Saviour  preached  a  new  birth  as  essential  to  admission 
into  the  Christian  church  or  reign  of  Heaven.  The  Jews  were 
born  of  flesh,  of  blood,  and  of  the  will  of  man  ;  but  not  of  God. 
But  the  Messiah,  who  came  to  set  up  a  new  kingdom,  preached 
a  new  doctrine,  and  gave,  only  to  those  who  received  him,  the 
power  or  privilege  to  become  the  children  of  God.  And  this,  we 
are  expressly  told,  cut  off  all  the  sons  of  the  flesh :  for,  only  "  to 
those  who  received  him,  who  were  born  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the 
will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God,  gave  he 
privilege  to  become  the  children  of  God,"  or  members  of  his 
church.  Hence,  to  Nicodemus,  he  affirmed,  "Except  a  man 
be  born  again  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God." 

But  our  learned  Dr.  Miller  is  full  of  proof-texts.  That  the 
Jewish  church  and  the  Christian  are  identically  one  and  the 
same  institution,  he  alleges  from  the  dislocated  joint  of  an 
apostolic  argument,  Heb.  iv.  2,  "For  unto  us  was  the  gospel 
preached  as  well  as  unto  them :"  that  is,  in  the  doctor's  vision, 
equivalent  to  saying,  the  same  gospel  was  preached  unto  the 


332  REVIEWS   OF   THE 

Jews  that  has  been  preached  to  us.  Suppose  that  were  the 
fact ;  would  that  make  us  Jews,  or  them  Christians  ?  I  It  cer- 
tainly, on  the  doctor's  showing,  has  as  much  power  to  make 
Gentiles  Jews  as  Jews  Christians  !  But  few  men,  in  this  our 
day  of  learned  criticism,  would  have  the  courage  to  make  such 
a  quotation :  for  all  the  learning  of  the  age  is  on  the  side  of 
reading  the  passage,  "For  glad  tidings  of  a  rest  to  come  aro 
preached  to  us  Christians,  as  were  glad  tidings  of  a  rest  (in 
Canaan)  preached  to  them ;"  but  the  good  tidings  of  a  rest  in 
Canaan  preached  to  them  did  not  profit  them,  (since  but  two 
men  of  the  whole  nation  entered  into  that  rest,)  because  of  not 
believing  the  glad  tidings  concerning  it  announced  to  them.  So 
evident  is  this  the  contextual  import  of  the  passage,  that  chil- 
dren in  our  Sunday-schools,  equally  with  the  most  learned  of 
our  critics,  so  understand  it.  Surely,  Dr.  Miller  has  survived 
his  generation  ! 

This  can  only  be  excelled  by  Dr.  Miller  himself.  The  Jewish 
church  ate  the  manna  and  drank  the  mystic  rock,  and  are  a  gos- 
pel church  because,  says  the  doctor,  they  are  builded  on  the 
same  foundation — the  Apostles  and  Prophets.  Moses  alone 
founded  the  Jewish  church.  It  is  only  at  this  Princeton  Obser- 
vatory, through  some  new  ecclesiastic  telescope,  that  the  Pro- 
phets and  Apostles  were  seen  along  with  Moses  when  he  founded 
the  church  of  Christ  in  the  wilderness  of  Sin  ! ! 

But,  finally,  the  doctor  completes  his  climax  by  the  parable  of 
the  Good  Olive  Tree,  Rom.  xi.  The  case  is  this  :  Jeremiah 
(chap,  xvi.)  in  allusion  to  the  past  history  of  the  nation,  says, 
*'  The  Lord  called  thy  name  a  green  olive-tree,  fair  and  of  goodly 
fruit."  Paul  to  the  Romans  applies  this  figure,  and  reminds 
some  Gentile  brethren,  compared  to  the  branches  of  a  wild  olive, 
that  they  had  been  grafted  into  the  good  olive-tree  and  made  to 
partake  of  its  root  and  fatness.  Some  of  the  natural  branches 
of  this  olive-tree  had  been  broken  off,  and  they  were  grafted  in 
their  place. 

Tliat  we  may  not  pervert  or  misapply  this  allegory,  it  is  im- 
portant to  keep  the  facts  on  which  it  is  founded  clearly  before 
our  minds.     Of  these,  the  following  arc  chief: — 

1.  "To  the  Jews  pertained  the  adoption,  and  the  glory,  and  the 
covenants,  and  the  yivinrj  of  the  law,  and  the  service  of  God,  and 
tha  promises,  whose  are  tho  fathers,  and  of  whom,  as  to  the  flesh, 
Christ  came."     But  Christ's  church  is  not  found  in  the  inventory 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  333 

of  their  peculiar  rights,  honors,  and  privileges.  They  had  the 
adoption  and  the  Shekinah.  They  were  the  only  people  that 
God  acknowledged  nationally,  and  among  whom  he  pitched 
his  tent  and  held  his  abode.  The  covenants  guarantying  bless- 
ings to  the  human  race,  and  of  making  them  nationally  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh  a  peculiar  people,  were  in  their  hands.  To  them 
the  law  of  circumcision  was  given.  The  typical  worship  of  the 
only  living  and  true  God  was  theirs.  The  promises  spiritual 
and  eternal  were  given  to  them  for  the  benefit  of  the  human 
race.  This,  indeed,  was  a  chief  blessing  ;  for  Paul  admits  their 
chief  advantage  to  have  been,  that  "to  them  were  committed  the 
oracles  of  God."  The  three  great  fathers,  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  in  whom  God  promised  to  bless  all  the  families  of 
the  earth,  were  their  natural  progenitors.  Hence  the  Messiah 
himself  was  the  natural  son  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  with 
some  fifty-two  other  progenitors  :  for,  according  to  Luke,  Jesus 
was  the  Jifty-sixth  person  in  descent  from  Abraham.  But  it  is 
nowhere  said  that  to  them  pertained  the  church  or  believing 
family  of  the  only  living  and  true  God.  This  is  assumed  by  all 
those  who  make  the  Jewish  nation  and  the  Christian  church 
identical.  There  was  a  people  of  God  before  Abraham,  and  after 
Abraham  they  did  not  derive  their  blood  from  him.  Abraham, 
that  he  might  be  a  great  father,  was  made  the  father  of  two 
races  of  men — a  natural  and  a  spiritual  progeny.  The  history 
of  Sarah  and  Hagar  and  their  two  sons  stereotypes  this  for  ever. 
Now  for  almost  two  thousand  years  these  two  races  were  chiefly 
found  in  one  nation.  This  loas  the  good  Olive  Tree.  Especially 
was  it  good  while  the  whole  nation,  as  such,  kept  pure  the  only 
true  worship  of  one  only  living  and  true  God.  But,  be  it  em- 
phatically said,  that  this  was  predicted  to  continue  so  only  till 
the  IMessiah  should  come.  For  the  patriarch  Jacob,  when  dying, 
said  of  Shiloh,  the  son  of  Judah,  "  To  him  shall  the  gathering  of 
the  people  be."  Many  a  type  and  prophecy  indicate  this. 
Hence,  according  to  prophecy,  "he  came  in  the  fulness  of  time" 
to  his  own  nation;  but  "  his  own  people  received  him  not."  "To 
as  many,  however,  as  received  him"  in  his  proper  character, 
and  to  none  else,  "he  gave  the  privilege  of  becoming  the  children 
of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name  ;  who  were  born 
not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man, 
but  of  God."  Hence  "if  we  be  Christ's,"  and  in  no  other  way, 
**  we  are  Abraham's  seed  and  heirs  according  to  the  promise." 


334  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

The  worldly  sanctuary  and  service  are  abolished,  and  the 
worldly  race  of  Abraham  are  broken  off  from  now  being  the  pe- 
culiar people  of  God.  A  portion,  however,  of  the  natural  seed 
of  Abraham  became  his  spiritual  seed,  and  formed  the  nucleus 
of  a  new  institution.  To  them,  as  Christ's  church,  the  believing 
Gentiles  are  added.  Thus  the  natural  branches  of  God's  an- 
cient olive-tree  are  every  one  broken  off;  and  none  but  spiritual 
branches,  or  believing  men  and  women,  are  regarded  as  his  pe- 
culiar people.  Into  this  good  olive-tree  believing  Gentiles  are 
as  admissible  as  believing  Jews ;  for  now  "  we  are  all  the 
children  of  God  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ ;"  and  "  if  any  man  be 
in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature,  old  things  are  passed  away,  be- 
hold all  things  have  become  new." 

How  Dr.  Miller  could  mystify  or  overlook  the  three  following 
declarations, — "  Because  of  unbelief  they  were  broken  off" — 
*'Thou  standest  by  faith" — and,  *' If  they  abide  not  in  unbelief, 
God  will  graft  them  in  again" — can  only  be  explained  on  the 
alleged  all-predominating  power  of  prejudice.  Are  not  these 
declarations  fatal  to  his  assumption  that  all  that  are  born  of  a 
certain  kind  of  human  flesh  are,  without  faith,  to  be  grafted  into 
Christ's  good  olive-tree  ?  To  any  such  engrafted  individual,  who 
could  say  with  Paul,  "  Thou  standest  hy  faitli  ?"  "  Be  not  high- 
minded,  but  fear !" 

Dr.  WiWqv^  8  ffth  argument  is — ^^  If  infants  were  once  memherSy 
and  if  the  church  remains  the  same,  they  undoubtedly  are  still 
members,  unless  some  positive  Divine  enactment  excluding  them  can 
he  found.''  P.  21.  But  we  have  shown  that  infants  never  were 
members  of  any  church  less  than  a  whole  nation,  or  a  church 
founded  on  blood.  Therefore,  his  fifth  argument  is,  in  one  of 
its  branches,  altogether  baseless  as  a  dream.  In  the  other 
branch — "  if  the  church  remains  the  same" — it  is  equally  with- 
out foundation.  There  never  was  a  community  on  the  earth 
founded  upon  faith  till  Jesus  Christ  came.  This  is  the  divine  and 
glorious  character  of  Christ's  Church.  All  other  communities, 
ancient  or  modern,  are  founded  in  blood  or  selfishness  of  some 
kind.  But  this  alone  is  founded  on  faith — "  If  thou  believest 
with  all  thy  heart  thou  mayest."  This  is  its  essential  and  indis- 
pensable prerequisite.  "  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is 
flesh."  Hence  we  must  be  born  again  in  order  to  enter  into 
Christ's  kingdom. 

His  sixth  argument  is  to  show  that  baptism  came  in  the  room  of 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  335 

circumcision.  He,  however,  strange  to  tell,  proves  that  it  has 
not  come  in  the  room  of  it.  He  says  that  "  circumcision  pub- 
licly ratified  admission  or  entrance  into  the  visible  family  of  God." 
P.  23.  But  circumcision  was  not  the  door  into  Abraham's 
family,  or  the  family  composed  of  the  children  of  Abraham. 
Natural  birth  was  the  door,  and  not  circumcision.  Moreover, 
circumcision  was  confined  to  male  children.  It  was  also  re- 
stricted to  the  eighth  day  after  natural  birth.  In  these  particu- 
lars, as  in  many  others,  baptism  is  proved  not  designed  to  fill 
or  occupy  the  room  of  circumcision.  He  seems  to  have  forgot- 
ten that  Jesus  Christ  was  himself  both  circumcised  and  bap- 
tized— that  the  twelve  Apostles  were  circumcised  and  baptized — 
that  the  whole  Christian  church,  for  seven  years  after  its  birth 
on  Pentecost,  in  its  myriads  of  converts,  all  Jews,  was  entirely 
composed  of  persons  both  circumcised  and  baptized — myriads 
of  the  Jews  believed  and  were  baptized.  Two  seals,  blood  and 
water,  attached  to  one  subject  and  to  one  covenant  as  doors  into 
the  church  ! 

Nay,  farther,  he  asserts  that  circumcision  was  done  away,  and 
that  baptism  came  in  the  room  of  it.  But  where  is  his  proof? 
Circumcision  was  not,  in  any  recorded  case,  dispensed  with. 
The  believing  Jews,  down  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testament  his- 
tory, circumcised  their  children.  Paul  publicly  declared,  by  an 
overt  act,  that  he  had  not  commanded  them  to  desist  from  cir- 
cumcising their  children.  It  is,  then,  perfectly  gratuitous  to 
affirm  that  circumcision  has  been  done  away  by  any  divine 
statute ;  and,  consequently,  that  baptism  has  come  in  the  room 
of  it. 

Dr.  Miller's  seventh  argument  for  infant  baptism  is  household 
baptism,  already  noted.  Bishop  Kenrick  gives  that  up,  as  wholly 
inconclusive,  and  so  must  every  enlightened  man  of  candour. 
There  is  no  case  of  family  baptism  indicating  infant  baptism. 
On  the  contrary,  we  have  shown  that  there  is  internal  evidence 
that  there  was  no  case  of  infant  baptism  in  any  one  of  them. 
But  suppose  there  was  no  ambiguity  on  the  subject  of  infant 
baptism,  that  it  was  a  matter  clearly  established  ;  even  then  it 
could  not  be  proved  that  in  the  three  or  four  families  reported 
to  have  been  all  baptized,  there  was  an  infant  in  them.  In  the 
first  place,  it  is  not  named.  Hence  it  is  inferential.  There  is 
no  circumstance  at  all  indicating  or  even  implying  it.  Then  it 
rests  upon  mere  possibility,  not  upon  the  least  probability ;  for 


836  REVIEWS   OF   THE 

there  are  amongst  us  many  families  or  households  and  not  an 
infant  in  them.  Therefore,  nothing  remains  but  bare  possibi- 
lity; and  he  that  builds  a  Christian  institution  upon  a  mere 
possibility,  is  not  to  be  reasoned  against ;  for  there  is  no  sound 
reason  in  him. 

His  eighth  reason  is,  that  "had  the  sign  of  infant  membership 
been  suddenly  withdrawn,  there  would  have  been  wounds  and 
murmurings,  and  feelings  of  deep  revolt  and  complaint  against 
the  new  economy.^'  Had  they,  indeed,  had  as  carnal  and  secu- 
lar views  as  Dr.  Miller  seems  to  have  of  Christianity  and  Chris- 
tian baptism,  there  would  have  been  a  fearful  tumult  and  up- 
roar among  the  people.  But  when  we  remember  that  faith  and 
repentance,  from  the  days  of  the  Harbinger,  were  preached  as 
essentially  prerequisite  to  baptism,  and  that  John  refused  to 
baptize  some  who  demanded  it  on  the  ground  of  having  Abra- 
ham, or  some  saint,  for  their  father,  we  only  wonder  that  any 
one  well  read  in  the  New  Testament  could  have  ever  found  such 
an  objection.  And  still  more  especially,  after  reading  the  Acts 
of  Apostles,  in  which  faith  is  so  often  connected  indissolubly 
with  baptism.  When  Jesus  said,  "  He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved,'^  who  can  rationally  expect  to  find  his 
followers  and  his  Apostles  teaching  by  their  practice — he  that  is 
baptized  without  faith  shall  be  saved  ? 

His  nintli  argument  is,  "  The  New  Testament  abounds  with 
passages  which  cannot  reasonably  be  explained  but  in  har- 
mony with  this  doctrine." 

Among  his  specifications,  the  following  are  deserving  of  notice: 
The  first  is  a  prediction  of  Isaiah,  intimating  that  a  time  would 
come  in  which  the  wolf  and  the  lamb  would  feed  together — in 
which  God  would  create  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth — increase 
the  age  and  comforts  of  his  people  and  hless  their  offspring.  He 
next  relies  upon  the  words  of  the  Saviour  to  those  who  were  in- 
hibiting parents  from  bringing  their  children  to  the  Lord  for 
the  imposition  of  his  hands  and  a  benediction.  The  next  is 
Peter's  assurance  to  the  Jews  that  the  promise  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  tendered  to  the  believing  Jews  and  their  descendants 
or  children.  And  then  the  argument  of  Paul  to  those  who  would 
have  some  believing  wives  or  husbands  to  separate  from  their  un- 
believing partners.  To  the  last  of  these  only  need  we  now  advert, 
as  the  others  have  been  already  examined  in  our  last  Review. 
Indeed,  the  promise  quoted  from  Isaiah  for  the  sake  of  tho 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  337 

phrase,  ^^and  tlidr  offspring  with  them,"  and  that  from  Acts  ii., 
*'  The  promise  is  to  you  and  your  children,"  are  but  a  puerile 
play  upon  the  words  children  and  offspring,  as  if  offspring  and 
children  were  identical  with  speechless  babes.  These  terms 
generally  mean  our  descendants.  "We  are  at  eighty  years  the 
children  of  our  fathers — -just  as  much  their  offspring  at  eighty 
years  as  eight  days.  These  are  so  palpably  a  begging  of  the 
question,  that  it  would  be  only  an  idle  parade  of  words  to  ex- 
pose them. 

But  the  sentence,  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  calls  for  a  special  notice,  as 
we  have  formerly  adduced  it  as  a  conclusive  argument  against 
the  slightest  probability  of  infant  baptism  as  either  taught  or 
thought  of  in  the  apostolic  age.  It  stands  before  the  public  un- 
responded  to  in  my  discussion  with  Mr.  Rice.  The  words  are — 
*'The  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified  y^y  (or  to)  "the  wife; 
and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  sanctified  by"  (or  to)  "the  husband; 
else  were  your  children  unclean  ;  but  now  are  they  holy."  Booth, 
in  his  "  Pedobaptism  Examined,"  adduces  more  than  twenty  of  our 
most  distinguished  critics,  reformers,  and  commentators ;  among 
whom  are  Melancthon,  Whitby,  Camerarius,  Wolfius,  Vitringa, 
&c.,  in  proof  that  the  holiness  or  sanctification  of  the  unbelieving 
party  and  their  children  here  is  not  that  of  the  new  covenant 
nor  of  church  relation ;  but  as  bread  is  "  sanctified  by  the  word 
of  God  and  prayer,"  so  is  this  relation  sanctified  as  respects 
matrimonial  intimacies.  The  marriage  relation  and  those  grow- 
ing out  of  it  are  not  to  be  dissolved,  but  are  lawful  and  proper, 
though  one  of  the  parties  should  not  be  converted  to  God  with 
the  other.  For,  were  it  otherwise,  your  offspring  would  be  un- 
clea7i  and  not  to  be  endured ;  but  now  are  they  holy  or  sanctified 
to  you.  Two  things  must  appear  obvious,  as  we  conceive,  from 
this  passage: — First,  That  the  unbelieving  parent  and  the  child 
were  in  the  same  sense  sanctified  or  holy  to  the  other  party ; 
and,  in  the  second  place,  that,  as  the  Apostle  changes  the  address 
from  the  third  person  to  the  second,  he  includes  all  the  infants 
born  to  the  church  in  Corinth.  "  Your,"  not  their  "  children," 
said  the  Apostle,  are  not  to  be  judged  unclean  and  to  be  repu- 
diated :  but  to  be  regarded  as  worthy  of  your  care,  protection, 
and  support. 

Now  had  infant  baptism  been  ordained  in  the  primitive  church, 
all  infants  would  have  been  alike  consecrated  by  it,  and  the 
Apostle  could  not  have  said,  ''Else  were  your  children  unclean;" 


338  REVIEWS   OF   THE 

for  that  could  not  have  been  supposed  had  they  been  baptized. 
Thus  it  is  manifest,  from  this  passage  alone,  that  infant  church 
membership  and  infant  baptism  were  alike  unknown  and  un- 
thought  of  in  the  age  of  the  Apostles. 

But  to  make  infant  holiness  a  passport  to  baptism  is  not  only- 
unsupported  but  unsupportable  by  any  plausible  proof  deduced 
from  the  New  Testament.  Infant  holiness,  in  a  covenant  sense, 
a  prerequisite  to  baptism,  is  certainly,  so  far  as  the  oracles  of 
Christ  and  his  Apostles  are  regarded,  a  new  idea.  What  a 
strange  argument  Dr.  Miller  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Peter !  Dr. 
Luke  makes  him  say,  "  Be  baptized  every  one  of  you  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins."  Doctor  Ananias  says  to  Paul,  "  Arise  and 
be  baptized,  and  wash  away  your  sins."  But  Dr.  Miller  says, 
"  Arise  and  be  baptized,  you  innocent  babes,  and  wash  your- 
selves, because  you  are  relatively  holy,  and  are  actually  born 
members  of  the  church."* 

Dr.  Miller's  tenth  and  last  argument  for  infant  baptism  is, 
"  Finally,  the  history  of  the  Christian  church  from  the  apostolic 
age  furnishes  an  argument  of  irresistible  force  in  favour  of  the 
Divine  authority  of  infant  baptism." 

Of  this  argument  we  cannot  say  much.  We  have  already 
noticed  it  in  our  last  essay,  and  shown  that  there  is  no  historic 
evidence  of  infant  baptism  till  the  third  century.  AVhen  first 
named,  too,  it  was  opposed  as  an  innovation.  And  what  is  no 
little  remarkable,  infant  communion  at  the  Lord's  table  is  as 
well  authenticated  from  the  annals  of  the  church  of  the  same 
century  as  it  is.  Nay,  more,  the  monastic  life,  or  perpetual 
celibacy,  constitutes  another  of  its  coevals,  and  virginity  becomes 
as  efficacious  to  gain  heaven  and  glory  as  faith  in  Christ  or  his 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  Infant  baptism,  infant  communion, 
perpetual  virginity,  are  of  the  same  origin  and  of  the  same  cen- 
tury, as  we  may  hereafter  show,  and  I  hope  to  the  conviction 
of  some  who  have  long  been  imposed  on  by  the  alleged  high 
antiquity  of  infant  church  membership  and  infant  baptism.  We 
have  not  yet  bid  adieu  to  Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton.  We  only  bid 
him  good-bye,  in  hope  of  listening  to  him  on  some  other  branch 
of  the  subject. 

*  Dr.  Miller  quotes  with  approbation  the  late  Dr.  Mason,  of  New  York,  who  took 
the  bold  and  presumptive  ground  that  "  the  infants  of  believing  per.<ons  are  born 
members  of  his  church."  P.  32.  Query — If  they  are,  horn  members  of  the  churchy 
?iow  can  haj^tism  he  the  dow  of  admission  f 


ADVOCATES  Or  INFANT  BAPTISM.  839 


CHAPTER  III. 

REVIEW   OF   PROFESSOR   MILLER  OF   PRINCETON;    AND   DR.  WALL, 
VICAR   OF    SHOREM,    IN    KENT. 

Francis  Patrick  Kenrick,  Bishop  of  Philadelphia,  as  before 
cited,  in  his  "  Treatise  of  Baptism"  admits  that  infant  baptism 
cannot  be  satisfactorily  sustained  from  the  inspired  writings. 
His  words  are — "Without  the  aid  of  tradition,  the  practice  of 
baptizing  infants  cannot  be  satisfactorily  vindicated,  the  Scripture 
proofs  on  this  point  not  being  thoroughly  conclusive  ;  yet  we  do 
not,  on  this  account,  neglect  the  arguments  which  it  furnishes, 
and  which  have  considerable  force."* 

Dr.  Wall  also  relies  much  more-on  tradition  than  on  apostolic 
testimony.  He  occupies  a  volume  with  quotations,  and  comments 
upon  them,  from  the  Fathers  and  the  ancient  Councils,  both 
general  and  local.  Tradition  is,  indeed,  his  main  pillar.  He 
quotes  incomparably  more  from  the  Fathers  and  ancient  writers 
than  from  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  or  from  Jesus  and  the 
Apostles.  He  begins  with  Clemens  Romanus,  and  Hermas, 
and  arrays  before  us  in  great  pomp,  -Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus, 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Tertullian,  Origen,  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Basil, 
St.  Gregory,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  .Jerome,  St.  Austin,  &c.  He  even 
adduces  Pelagius,  the  heterodox  Cselestius,  and  Pope  Zosimus. 
The  Donatists,  Arians,  and  Pelagians,  equally  with  the  orthodox, 
are  made  to  pass  in  review,  and  to  declare  in  favour  of  infant 
ablution  or  infant  immersion.  With  Dr.  Wall  there  was  no 
baptism,  in  form  or  in  fact,  without  immersion.  But  those  who 
now  rely  upon  him  in  sustaining  the  traditional  subjects  of 
baptism  will  not  hear  him  on  the  apostolic  form  of  the  institu- 
tion itself.  They  admit  but  one-half  of  his  testimony,  and  reject 
the  other  half.  They  will  have  infant  affusion,  but  Dr.  Wall 
will  have  infant  immersion. 

In  the  present  essay,  I  shall  attempt  to  show  that  the  argu- 
ment from  tradition,  drawn  out  with  so  much  display,  proves 
too  much  for  any  sect  of  Protestants  in  Christendom.  Ad- 
mitting that  every  author  adduced  relates  with  all  truthfulness 
and  fidelity  the  facts  which  he  states,  as  transpiring  in  his  own 

*  Page  129,  Philadelphia  edition,  18-13. 


340  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

age  or  country,  on  Protestant  principles,  with  Protestants  them- 
selves it  can  afford  no  authority  for  infant  baptism. 

It  is  a  rule  or  law  of  evidence,  of  universal  acquiescence  and 
authority,  that  the  testimony  of  any  witness  is  admissible  or  in- 
admissible to  the  full  extent  of  his  deposition.  So  far,  then,  as 
it  is  his  testimony,  we  are  obliged  to  receive  all  or  none  of  it. 
If,  for  example,  we  receive  the  testimony  of  Tertullian,  Origen, 
Cyprian,  Chrysostom,  &c.  &c.,  as  to  the  existence  of  infant 
baptism  in  their  day  and  country,  we  must  also  receive  their 
testimony  in  favour  of  infant  communion,  and  in  favour  of  the 
monastic  and  ascetic  life.  With  whatever  respect  for  them,  or 
with  whatever  authority  we  receive  their  testimony  in  the  one 
case,  we  must  receive  it  in  the  other  cases.  If  their  testimony 
be  authoritative  touching  any  fact  or  opinion,  as  to  the  existence 
of  it,  the  universality  of  it,  or  the  meaning  of  it,  it  is  equally  so 
touching  them  all.  This  being  an  oracle  of  common  sense — an 
axiom  in  moral  evidence — we  assume  it,  and  proceed  upon  the 
assumption,  as  upon  an  incontrovertible  fact. 

We,  therefore,  proceed  to  show  that  all  the  authors  of  note  re- 
lied on  by  Dr.  Miller,  Dr.  Wall,  or  any  other  doctor  of  Protestant 
theology,  in  proof  of  the  early  existence  of  infant  baptism,  who 
have  distinctly  named  or  alluded  to  it,  as  a  custom,  or  rite, 
existing  in  their  time,  equally  establish  the  existence,  uni- 
versality, and  antiquity  of  religious  celibacy,  the  sanctifying 
efficacy  of  virginity,  and  the  superlative  merit  of  the  monastic 
life. 

Since  writing  my  last  essay  on  this  subject,  I  have  read,  with 
more  or  less  attention,  some  hundreds  of  pages,  many  of  which, 
though  read  in  former  years,  were  again  read  as  though  en- 
tirely new,  that  I  might  repose  in  the  full  assurance  that  I  give 
a  faithful  view  of  the  testimony  and  opinions  of  the  authors 
quoted.  And,  although  in  possession  of  the  principal  records 
of  both  Grecian  and  Roman  Fathers  and  their  opinions,  I  gene- 
rally prefer  to  quote  their  opinions  and  statements  from  Taylor's 
*' Ancient  Christianity,"  because  now  a  popular  work;  and 
because  he  has  with  great  fidelity  and  ability  examined  and 
reported  the  views  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  Fathers  on  the 
subjects  named;  and  especially  because  his  antagonists,  the 
Oxford  Tract  theologians,  with  all  their  armour  on,  have  not, 
60  far  as  I  have  learned,  presumed  to  cavil  at  his  array  of 
patristic  authority  and  opinions. 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  341 

I  state  the  argument  in  the  following  terms : — Komanists  quote 
the  Greek  and  early  Roman  fathers  of  the  four  first  centuries,  in 
proof  of  monastic  life — the  celibacy  of  the  clergy — the  merit  of  per- 
petual virginity — the  pontificate  of  Feter  in  Rome — and  infant  com- 
munion. Protestants  quote  the  same  authorities  for  infant  bap- 
tism, and  argue  from  them  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Romanists 
for  their  other  traditions.  But  Protestants  repudiate  the  Greek 
and  Roman  Fathers  as  competent  and  credible  witnesses  for  in- 
fant communion,  the  pontificate  of  Peter  in  Rome,  the  monastic 
life,  and  a  bachelor  priesthood;  yet  they  quote  with  confidence 
and  hear  with  gladness  the  same  authors  in  favour  of  infant  bap- 
tism. This  we  regard  as  an  indefensible  aberration  from  sound 
logic  and  fair  play.  If  we  receive  their  testimony  in  the  one  case, 
in  evidence  of  the  universality,  antiquity,  and  authority  of  in- 
fant baptism,  we  ought  by  all  means  to  receive  the  whole  of 
their  testimony  in  the  case  of  the  universality,  antiquity,  and 
authority  of  the  monastic  life — the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  the 
merits  of  perpetual  virginity,  &c.  &c. 

But  Protestants  will  say  that  the  Romanists  in  these  cases 
depend  upon  tradition  alone  for  authority,  while,  in  the  case  of 
infant  baptism,  we  mainly  depend  upon  scriptural  authority,  and 
only  corroborate  it  by  the  ancient  Greek  and  Roman  Fathers, 
historians,  and  commentators.  This,  however,  is  not  the  fact. 
Romanists  plead  for  scriptural  authority  for  their  traditions  and 
found  their  arguments  on  what  they  call  **  Bible  doctrine,"  if 
not  upon  express  Bible  precepts  and  positive  enactments.  Pro- 
testants are  not  able  to  maintain  this  ground  with  sensible  and 
well  read  Romanists.  For  example,  take  the  monastic  life,  the 
celibacy  of  the  clergy,  and  the  merits  of  perpetual  virginity,  and 
ask  a  well  bred  and  well  read  Romanist,  What  Bible  authority 
have  you,  sir,  for  these  traditions  ?  AYhat  defence  will  he 
make  ?  Probably  he  will  begin  with  Paul,  the  great  Apostle  to 
the  Gentiles,  Barnabas  his  companion,  and  Timothy  his  adopted 
son  ;  and  show  that  they  waived  matrimony  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven's  sake.  He  will  also  tell  of  those  who  forsook  houses, 
and  lands,  and  husbands,  and  wives,  for  the  Lord's  sake.  Nay, 
he  will  read  you  two  learned  homilies — one  on  a  passage  from 
Jesus,  and  one  from  Paul.  That  from  Jesus  is  recorded  Mat- 
thew xix.  12 :  "  For  there  are  some  eunuchs  which  were  so  born 
from  their  mother's  womb,  and  there  are  some  eunuchs  which 
were  made  eunuchs  by  men,  and  there  be  eunuchs  who  have 

29* 


342  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven^s  sake. 
He  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  Mm  receive  it."  Monks,  say  some 
Romanists,  are  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake. 
"  They  have  made  themselves  so."  "  Now  let  him  that  can  re- 
ceive it,  receive  it;"  that  is,  say  they,  ^^  make  themselves  eunucTis, 
07'  monks,  for  the  sake  of  gaining  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  The 
famous  Origen  literally  made  himself  a  eunuch  for  the  kingdom 
of  heaven's  sake.  The  Essenes,  contemporary  with  the  Messiah, 
are  by  some  supposed  to  be  here  alluded  to  by  him.  They  were 
really  monks  for  the  sake  of  greater  seclusion  from  the  world, 
and  were  regarded  as  the  most  pure  and  holy  sect  among  the 
Jews.  Here,  then,  says  the  Romanist,  is  high  authority  for 
the  plea  of  the  superior  spirituality  and  sanctity  of  virginity 
and  the  ascetic  life.  Now  who  can  make  a  more  scriptural  ar- 
gument for  infant  baptism  than  this  ? — ! 

But  this  is  not  all.  Paul  teaches  the  theory  as  well  as  the 
practice  of  celibacy.  Hear  him  : — "  It  is  good,"  says  he,  "  for 
a  man  not  to  touch  a  woman."  And  certainly  better  for  a 
woman  not  to  touch  a  man  !  "  I  say,  then,  to  the  unmarried 
and  to  widows,  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  abide"  (single  !) 
"  even  as  I.  For  I  would  that  all  men  were  even  as  I  myself. 
Art  thou  loosed  from  a  wife,  then  seek  not  a  wife.  He  that  is 
unmarried  careth  for  the  things  of  the  Lord,  how  he  may  please 
the  Lord ;  but  he  that  is  married  careth  for  the  things  of  the 
world  how  he  may  please  his  wife.  The  unmarried  woman 
careth  for  the  things  of  the  Lord,  that  she  may  be  holy  both  in 
body  and  in  spirit ;  but  she  that  is  married  careth  for  the  things 
of  the  world,  how  she  may  please  her  husband."  Doubtless, 
then,  if  "  he  that  giveth  his  daughter  in  marriage  doeth  well,  he 
that  giveth  her  not  in  marriage  doeth  better."  Now  who  may 
not  hence  infer  that  Paul  was  in  favour  of  nuns  as  well  as  monks? 
From  these  premises,  can  any  one  reasonably  say  that  the  Ro- 
manist depends  less  on  the  13ible  for  his  holiness  of  virginity 
and  the  excellency  of  monkery  than  does  the  Pedobaptist  for 
his  infant  initiation  and  dedication  to  the  Lord  ?  I  trow  not. 
So  far,  to  say  the  least,  methinks,  the  Bible  plea  for  the  sanctity 
and  blessedness  of  celibacy  and  that  of  infant  holiness,  or  infant 
baptism,  are  inferentially  equal. 

13ut  our  present  business  is  with  tradition.  For  this  purpose, 
we  have  selected  that  prolific  cause  and  fountain  of  Roman  pol- 
lutions, the  Munachism.    We  shall,  therefore,  give  a  few  spcci- 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  813 

mens  of  the  estimation  in  which  it  was  held  by  the  Ante-Nicene 
Fathers.  To  be  understood  by  the  least  conversant  with  eccle- 
siastic history,  in  these  brief  allusions  and  quotations,  I  will  state 
that  the  Fathers,  so  called  by  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches, 
are  divided  into  three  classes : — The  ^2^05^oZtc  Fathers — viz.  Bar- 
nabas, Clement  of  Rome,  Hermas,  Ignatius,  and  Polycarp. 
The  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  or  those  who  were  conspicuous  at  or 
before  the  Council  of  Nice,  which  sat  two  or  three  months  at 
Nice,  in  Bythinia,  a.  d.  325.  Socrates  says  that  318  Bishops 
met  in  this  council.  The  present  Mcene  Creed  is,  indeed,  but 
a  development  or  expansion  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  made  by 
150  Bishops  at  the  second  general  council,  which,  in  381,  met 
at  Constantinople. 

The  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  so  called,  are  the  teau  ideal  of  Pro- 
testant orthodoxy;  and,  hence,  the  names  of  Papias,  Justin 
Martyr,  Ireneeus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Origen, 
Cyprian,  Lactantius,  Eusebius,  Athanasius,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Hilary,  Basil,  the  two  Gregories,  Nazianzen  and  Nyssen,  Am- 
brose, Jerome,  Augustin,  Chrysostom,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and 
Theodoret,  are  conspicuous — not  all,  indeed,  but  a  majority  of 
them,  Ante-Nicene :  for  there  are  in  all  forty-tivo  Fathers,  a  ma- 
jority of  which  were  Ante-Nicene,  while  the  others  are  called  Post- 
Nicene.  These,  together  with  the  five  Apostolic  Fathers,  make 
out  the  entire  Fathers  of  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  Protestant 
churches,  amounting  in  all  io  forty-seven. 

Now,  in  glancing  at  these,  we  shall  summon  a  few  of  the  most 
famous,  both  as  fathers  and  as  writers,  to  represent  the  whole 
patristic  brotherhood,  whose  opinions  give  laws  to  the  Catholic 
church  in  all  matters  of  opinion,  faith,  and  practice.  Before 
hearing  them  depose,  we  shall  quote  a  few  passages  from  the 
most  conspicuous  and  authoritative  of  them,  declarative  of  the 
Catholic  views  of  the  monastic  life. 

But,  as  farther  prefatory  to  these,  we  must  allude  to  the  Gre- 
cian fountain  of  errors,  which,  together  with  the  Gnostic  and  Ro- 
man fountains,  gradually  corrupted  the  whole  Christian  church. 

The  Greeks  had  a  temple  dedicated  to  Hestia,  who,  as  the 
tradition  goes,  when  wooed  by  Neptune,  laid  her  hand  on  the 
head  of  Jupiter  and  vowed  perpetual  virginity ;  for  which  he  al- 
lotted to  her  a  throne  in  the  midst  of  every  mansion,  the  choicest 
portions  of  the  sacrifices,  and  to  he  honoured  in  all  the  temples  of 
the  gods. 


S44  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

The  Roman  Vesta,  for  whom  was  erected  a  splendid  temple 
in  Rome,  was  but  a  new  version  of  the  Grecian  Hestia.  On  the 
altar  of  this  splendid  temple  perpetually  flamed  a  holy  fire, 
tended  by  six  priestesses.  Hence,  at  an  early  period,  arose  in 
the  Christian  churches  the  idea  of  having  in  the  cloister  con- 
nected with  them  bands  of  females  sworn  to  chastity  and  the 
Lord.  These  became  the  archetypes  of  all  the  sisterhoods  in  all 
the  abbeys,  convents,  priories,  nunneries,  cloisters,  in  ancient 
and  modern  Christendom.  The  grand  question  which  pioneered 
the  way  for  the  general  admission  into  the  church  of  these  abomi- 
nations, was,  "  Satan  has  his  devoted  ividows  and  his  virgin  priest- 
esses, and  shotddiiot  Ch-ist  have  his?" 

Concerning  this  much  extolled  institution,  so  canonized  and 
glorified  as  the  only  path  to  the  highest  honours  of  Paradise,  we 
have  the  opinion  of  almost  all  the  early  Greek  and  Roman  Fa- 
thers. It  is  set  forth  in  such  terms  as  the  following: — "The 
celestial  or  angelic  excellence  of  virginity,"  cultivated  by  "the 
spouses  of  Christ,"  who,  "in  the  celestial  and  apostolic  practice 
of  vowing  virginity  to  the  Lord,"  have  arisen  to  the  loftiest  pin- 
nacle in  the  temple  as  "  Christ's  jewels." 

It  would  be  disgusting  rather  than  acceptable  to  most  of  our 
readers,  to  enter  into  the  secrets  of  these  holy  vestal  virgins,  de- 
voted to  the  church.  Yet  we  must  allude  to  the  contaminations 
of  sacerdotal  virtue  universally  attendant  on  their  existence,  as 
expressed  by  their  warmest  advocates  and  apologists.  Even 
Cyprian  himself  speaks  of  clerical  paramours — of  the  spiritual 
intercourse  of  these  father  confessors  with  these  immaculate  an- 
gelic virgins,  as  to  make  the  whole  institution  a  public  scandal, 
a  disgrace  to  even  Rome  or  Corinth  in  their  most  wanton  days, 
and  to  make  his  nunneries  or  abbeys  any  thing  but  houses  of 
prayer — the  residence  of  virgin  purity  and  piety. 

These  abuses,  or  rather  legitimate  fruits  of  the  system,  called 
forth  many  an  excuse,  and  originated  some  singular  expositions 
of  Scripture  ;  a  sample  of  which  we  will  give  from  Tertullian — 
"  The  command,  '  Increase  and  multiply,'  is  abolished  ;  yet,  as  I 
think,  (contrary  to  the  Gnostic  opinion,)  this  command  in  the 
first  instance,  and  now  the  removal  of  it,  are  from  one  and  the 
same  God  ;  who  then,  and  in  that  early  seed-time  of  the  human 
race,  gave  the  reins  to  the  marrying  principle  until  the  world 
sliould  be  replenished,  and  until  he  had  prepared  the  elements 
of  a  new  (school  of  discipline.     13ut  now,  in  this  conclusion  of 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  345 

the  ages,  he  restrains  what  once  he  had  let  loose,  and  revokes 
what  he  had  permitted.  In  a  thousand  instances,  indulgence  is 
granted  at  the  beginning  of  things.  So  it  is  that  a  man  plants 
a  wood  and  allows  it  to  grow,  intending  in  due  time  to  use  the 
axe.  The  wood,  then,  is  the  old  dispensation,  which  is  done 
away  by  the  gospel,  in  which  the  axe  is  laid  at  the  root  of  the 
tree.^'  So  reasons  the  first  man  who,  in  any  extant  records  of 
the  church,  first  names  infant  baptism  ! !  We  shall  next  hear 
St.  Cyprian,  born  a.  d.  200. 

So  early  as  the  age  of  St.  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  born 
one  hundred  years  after  John  the  Apostle  died,  the  notion  of  the 
divine  virtue  and  excellency  of  celibacy  had  so  generally  pre- 
vailed in  the  church,  that  he  complains,  in  no  measured  terms, 
of  the  abuses  of  it.  "  Concerning  those,"  says  he,  "who,  after 
having  solemnly  devoted  themselves  to  continence,  have  been 
found  cohabiting  with  men — [detedae  in  eodem  ledo  jMriter  man- 
sisse  cum  mascidis) — yet  professing  themselves  inviolate,  you 
have  desired  my  advice.  It  is,  then,"  replies  the  bishop,  "by 
no  means  to  be  allowed  that  young  women  live  with  men.  If, 
indeed,  they  have  cordially  dedicated  themselves  to  Christ,  let 
them  modestly  and  chastely,  and  without  subterfuge,  hold  to 
their  purpose,  and  thus,  constant  and  firm,  look  for  the  reward 
of  virtue — premium  virginitaiis."  So  general  was  the  idea  of 
the  angelic  virtue  of  celibacy,  that,  in  Cyprian's  time,  it  had 
"been  so  perverted  by  the  priesthood  as  to  call  for  Cyprian's  de- 
nunciations against  the  clergy  in  such  language  as,  "How  shall 
the  clergy  be  guides  in  the  path  of  virtue  and  piety,  if  from 
them  proceeds  a  contaminating  warranty  of  vice.  Thou  hast, 
therefore,  well  done  in  withdrawing  from  the  deacon  and  others 
qui  cum  virginihus  dormire  consuevenmt.'"^ 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  rather  preceded  St.  Cyprian  as  a 
writer,  speaks  in  terms  as  bold  as  the  Bishop  of  Carthage.  But 
we  prefer  to  quote  a  few  words  more  from  St.  Cyprian,  because 
Dr.  Miller  and  Dr.  Wall  make  much  of  his  testimony  as  to  the 
prevalence  of  infant  baptism  in  his  Carthaginian  diocese.  How 
monkery  prospered  under  his  dispensations,  we  may  learn  from 
his  encomiums  upon  it.  In  addressing  nuns,  he  says,  "  These 
are  the  flowers  of  the  ecclesiastical  plant — the  grace  and  orna- 
ment of  the  heavenly  grace — a  gladsome  produce — a  work,  whole 

*  Who  are  accustomed  to  sleep  with  virgins.    Ancieni  Chris.,  p.  114. 


REVIEWS   OF   THE 

and  incorrupt,  of  all  honour  and  all  praise — the  image  of  God 
reflecting  the  sanctity  of  the  Lord  and  the  most  illustrious  por- 
tion of  Christ's  flocks.  By  these,  [nuns,]  and  in  these,  is  the 
noble  fecundity  of  Mother  Church  recommended  and  made 
copiously  to  flourish  ;  and  just  so  much  as  this  plentiful  vir- 
ginity swells  its  numbers,  does  the  Mother  herself  augment  her 
joys.  It  is  to  these,  then,  that  I  speak — it  is  these  that  I  pro- 
ceed to  exhort — yet  in  affection  rather  than  in  the  tones  of  au- 
thority." Farther,  our  good  Archbishop  Cyprian  says,  "  The 
continence  and  pudicity  proper  to  a  nun  do  not  consist  merely 
in  the  inviolate  perfection  of  the  body ;  but,  besides,  the  inte- 
grity of  the  body  consists  in  the  fair  and  modest  attire  and 
ornament  of  the  person."  After  this  quotation,  Mr.  Taylor  ex- 
claims, and  "we  exclaim  with  him,  "Here  is  excellent  Quakerism 
as  well  as  Popery,  and  both  sixteen  hundred  years  old."  Mo- 
desty forbids  us  from  quoting  Cyprian  in  what  he  says  farther 
of  this  "plentiful  virginity,"  when  reproving  them  for  their 
shameful  pranks  at  the  public  baths.  He  asks,  "What  have 
virgins  of  the  church  to  do  at  promiscuous  baths — to  violate  the 
commonest  dictates  of  feminine  modesty  ?  !  With  your  robes, 
your  personal  honour  and  reserve  are  cast  off."  According  to 
Mr.  Taylor,  modern  Popery  is  quite  a  reform  upon  ''ancient 
Christianity,^^  or  the  Christianity  contemporary  with  the  origin  of 
infant  baptism. 

If  I  might  quote  St.  Bernard  here,  though  not  of  the  fathers 
of  the  church,  but  as  one  who  had  more  personal  authority  and 
popularity  than  any  one  man  that  ever  lived  since  the  Council 
of  Nice — to  whom  popes  and  their  vassals  gave  equal  reve- 
rence— of  whom  Luther  said,  "  If  ever  there  has  been  a  pious 
monk  who  feared  God,  it  was  St.  Bernard,  whom  I  hold,"  said 
the  reformer,  "in  much  higher  esteem  than  all  other  monks  and 
priests  throughout  the  globe." 

Of  virginity,  which  he  calls  chastity,  he  says,  "What  so  fair 
as  this  chastity,  which  makes  of  a  man  an  angel !  An  angel 
and  a  churchman  differ,  indeed,  as  to  purity,  but  not  as  to  vir- 
tue— for,  although  the  purity  of  the  angel  be  the  happier  of  the 
two,  that  of  the  man  must  be  admitted  to  be  the  more  ener- 
getic." "Who,  then,"  continues  he,  "would  scruple  to  call  the 
life  of  the  Coclebs  a  celestial  and  angelic  life  !  or  what  will  all 
the  elect  be  at  the  resurrection  which  yc  are  not  even  now,  as 
the  angels  of  God  in  heaven,  who  abstain  from  matrimonial  con- 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  347 

nections/*  "You  grasp,  my  beloved  brethren,  the  pearl  of 
great  price,  ye  grasp  that  sanctity  which  renders  you  like  to  the 
saints  in  glory,  and  the  home  servants  of  God,  as  saith  the 
Scriptures,  incorruptness  places  us  next  to  God ;  not  by  your 
own  merits  are  you  what  you  are,  but  by  the  grace  of  God ; 
and,  as  chastity  and  sanctity,  I  may  call  you  terrestrial  an- 
gels." 

It  would  be  easy  for  me  to  fill  many  pages  from  Tertullian  and 
Cyprian  to  the  same  effect.  They  are,  indeed,  followed  in  their 
views  by  almost  all  the  ancient  ohurch.  Isidore  says,  "As  high 
as  the  heavens  are  above  the  earth,  and  as  far  as  the  soul  excels 
the  body,  so  does  the  state  of  virginity  surpass  that  of  matri- 
mony," That  these  were  not  novelties  or  innovations,  even  in 
the  times  of  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  may  be  inferred  from  a 
passage  in  Justin  Martyr's  Second  Apology.  His  words  are, 
"Many  men  as  well  as  women  who,  having  followed  the  Chris- 
tian institution  from  their  earliest  years,  have  remained  to  an 
advanced  age — sixty  or  seventy  years  incorrupt — diaphoroi  dia- 
menousai — unmarried  or  inviolate."  Nay,  we  find  in  the  Epis- 
tles of  Ignatius  to  Polycarp,  contemporaries,  if  not  converts,  of 
John  the  Apostle,  indications  of  the  germ  of  this  opinion  or 
theory  of  asceticism.  His  words  are,  "If  any  one  be  able  to 
abide  in  purity,  (celibacy,)  in  honour  of  the  Lord's  flesh,  let 
him  do  so  without  boasting.  If  he  boasts,  he  is  lost ;  or,  if  he 
consider  himself,  on  that  account,  more  than  the  bishop,  he 
perishes." 

The  early  attempts  to  fabricate  tales  of  the  perpetual  virginity 
of  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  owe  their  origin  to  the  same  spirit 
of  error.  They  will  have  her  still  the  Virgin  Marxj,  though  the 
wife  of  Joseph,  after  she  had  brought  forth  her  first  born  son. 
Could  Jesus  have  been  her  first  born,  if  she  had  never  had  a 
second  child  ?  Or  could  it  be  said  that  he  knew  her  not,  until 
slie  had  hrouglit  forth  her  first  born  son,  if  he  had  never  known 
her  ?  But  there  is  nothing  can  stand  erect,  however  strong  and 
clear,  before  the  spirit  of  fraud  or  fiction. 

It  is  alleged  that  Ignatius  is  the  first  that  called  the  nuns 
"^7ie  espoused  of  Christ,"  and  '■'■  Christ* s  jewels."  But  this  is  a 
matter  of  little  moment,  inasmuch  as  at  a  very  early  period  a 
new  nomenclature  was  introduced.  We  hear  Tertullian  asking 
with  indignation,  "Shall  one  who  has  contracted  a  second  mar- 
riage baptize  ?"    "  Or,  shall  such  a  one  make  the  eucharistiG 


348  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

oblation?"  But  before  this  style  and  terminology,  we  have  the 
Gnostics,  the  Nicolaitans,  the  Essenes,  the  Ebionites,  and  the 
Cabalistic  Jews  foisting  into  the  Christian  vocabulary  an  im- 
pure speech,  from  which  it  has  never  been  expurgated.  In  view 
of  this  fact,  and  the  history  of  the  first  century  of  Christianity, 
I  concur  with  Isaac  Taylor,  author  of  "Spiritual  Despotism," 
and  the  "Natural  History  of  Enthusiasm,"  &c.  &c.,  in  the  fol- 
lowing opinions: — "The  opinion  that  has  forced  itself  upon  my 
own  mind  is  to  this  efiect ;  that  the  period,  dating  its  commence- 
ment from  the  death  of  the  last  of  the  Apostles  or  apostolic 
men,  was  altogether  as  little  deserving  to  be  selected  and  pro- 
posed as  a  pattern  as  any  one  of  the  first  five  of  church  history ; 
it  had,  indeed,  its  single  points  of  excellence,  and  of  a  high 
order  ;  but  by  no  means  shown  in  those  consistent  and  exem- 
plary qualities  which  should  entitle  it  to  the  honour  of  being 
considered  as  a  model  to  after  ages."     "  The  grossest  errors 

OF  THEORY  AND  PRACTICE  ARE  TO  BE  TRACED  TO  THEIR  ORIGIN 
IN    THE    FIRST    CENTURY." 

Of  course,  we  should  not  wonder  to  see  such  men  as  Ambrose, 
Basil,  Gregory  Nyssen,  Chrysostom,  Jerome,  and  Augustine, 
endorsing  for  celibacy,  monkery,  and  the  whole  ascetic  system, 
as  set  forth  in  the  writings  of  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  and  their 
predecessors.  We  can  endorse  the  great  Basil  affirming  that 
"Virginity  is  that  which  makes  man  resemble  the  incorruptible 
God;"  and  I  can  believe  J.  Taylor  in  affirming,  "that  an  unre- 
served translation  of  Basil,  one  of  the  best  of  the  fathers,  could 
it  bo  tolerated,  would  astound  the  Christian  world."  And  what 
shall  we  say  of  Chrysostom,  addressing  a  nun,  saying  that, 
"like  cherubim  and  seraphim,  she  and  her  order  constituted  not 
the  attendants  of  the  Eternal  King,  but  his  very  chariot." 
And,  again,  "gold  hath,  indeed,  by  nature  its  splendour;  but 
when  saturate  with  fire,  how  admirable,  nay,  even  fearful  it  is  ! 
And  thus,  when  a  soul  such  as  this  occupies  the  body,  not  only 
shall  the  spectacle  be  wondered  at  by  men,  but  by  angels." 
Glory,  honour,  and  immortality  to  the  nuns  ! ! 

To  complete  the  picture  of  ancient  (but  not  Apostolic)  Chris- 
tianity, to  which  Dr.  Wall  and  Dr.  Miller  trace  up  info,nt  bap- 
tism in  the  argument  now  under  consideration,  I  feel  disposed 
to  introduce  St.  Athanasius  himself,  '^  the  chief  of  tlie  first  three'* 
in  the  esteem  of  them  that  worship  antiquity.  Bu£  I  have  space 
only  to  say  of  him  what  is  equally  true,  and  truly  said  by  Mr. 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  849 

Taylor,  of  his  contemporaries — Gregory  of  Nyssa,  his  brother 
Basil,  and  Ambrose — in  the  following  interrogatories  : — 

1st.  "Aside  from  the  mere  ecclesiastical  question  of  the  pre- 
tensions of  the  Bishop  of  Kome,  can  any  broad  and  intelligible 
distinction  be  established  between  Gregory  Nyssen  and  the 
Popery  of  the  tenth  century  ?" 

2d.  "Can  any  important  distinction  be  made  good  between 
this  Gregory  and  his  contemporaries,  Basil,  Athanasius,  and 
Ambrose  V 

3d.  "And  this  question  I  would  humbly  and  seriously  ad- 
dress to  men  fearing  God,  [and  completely  informed,)  whether 
EACH  ARTICLE  of  Paul's  explicit  prediction  of  the  coming  apos- 
tasy, does  not  find  its  pointed  and  complete  fulfilment  in  the 
system  which  this  writer's  works  imbody  V 

And  of  Jerome — Jerome,  the  author  of  the  Vulgate — ^the 
more  learned  and  intelligent  Jerome,  the  same  author  says, 
"Jerome  must  take  his  place  among  the  foremost  promoters  of 
the  false  principles  of  tlie  Nicerie  church  system" — of  Popery  in 
its  worst  form. 

I  prefer  interposing  between  myself  and  a  portion  of  the 
reading  public,  the  learned,  the  evangelical,  the  popular,  and 
eloquent  author  of  "  Spiritual  Despotism,"  "  Saturday  Evening," 
"Ancient  Christianity,"  and  other  interesting  and  instructive 
treatises ;  because  he  cannot  be  suspected  of  any  squinting  to 
what  some  might  call  our  own  peculiarities  on  the  proper  scrip- 
tural evangelical  subject  of  Christian  baptism. 

No  one,  however,  in  England  or  in  America,  in  the  present 
century,  nor  in  any  century  since  Luther  fulminated  against  the 
Lion  of  Popery,  has  given  a  more  complete  and  decisive  blow  to 
English  and  Scottish  pedobaptism  and  pedorantism,  so  far  as 
any  appeal  or  reference  to  human  tradition,  ecclesiastic  history, 
or  patristic  authority,  however  nearly  approximating  the  apos- 
tolic age,  the  days  of  Saint  John,  Saint  Peter,  or  Saint  Paul, 
than  this  same  Mr.  Isaac  Taylor,  in  his  treatise,  from  which  I 
have  drawn  so  freely  in  this  essay. 

Courteous  reader,  ask  no  more  how  could  the  custom  of  bap- 
tizing infants,  or  unbelieving  boys,  so  soon  and  so  generally 
appear  in  the  ages  immediately  succeeding  the  Apostles.  This, 
however,  is  not  the  fact,  as  is  too  often  assumed,  and  as  we  may 
thereafter  show ;  but  admitting,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that 
it  is  named  by  Tertullian  at  the  close  of  the  second  or  at  the 


850  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

commencement  of  the  third  century,  what  of  it,  since  then,  or 
long  before  that  time,  also  appeared  monkery,  asceticism,  the 
omnipotence  of  virginity,  and  the  embryo  blossoms  of  all  the 
abominations  of  Popery? — !  Errors  universally  reprobated  by 
all  Protestants,  which  Papistical  writers  advocate,  and  without 
which  Popery  would  immediately  die,  are  still  more  ancient, 
more  venerable,  more  universal  than  infant  affusion  or  infant 
immersion,  and  advocated  by  all  and  hy  more  than  all  the  ancient 
writers  that  are  quoted  in  proof  of  the  antiquity,  universality, 
or  of  the  importance  of  infant  ablution. 

Let  no  one  ask.  How  could  infant  baptism  be  so  early  intro- 
duced and  spread  so  fast  or  so  far,  unless  originally  of  apostolic 
authority,  because  of  his  own  inability  to  answer  the  question. 
Is  he  a  Protestant?  Let  him,  then,  rather  ask.  How  a  virgin 
priesthood,  refusing  to  ordain  the  husband  of  one  wife,  could  so 
early  have  been  imagined,  much  less  enacted  in  the  face  of  him 
who  said,  *'Let  him  be  the  husband  of  one  wife — ruling  his  own 
children  well,''  &c.  Is  he  a  Protestant?  Then  let  him  ask, 
How  could  they  so  early  refuse  the  cup  to  the  laity,  in  the  face 
of  the  oracle  of  Christ — saying,  *'  Drink  you  all  of  it."  Is  he  a 
Protestant?  Let  him  then  explain  how  could  they  have  con- 
verted Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  into  a  virgin,  and  christened 
her  the  immaculate  holy  Mary.  And  although  Jesus  repudiated 
her  having  any  peculiar  power  with  him,  because  she  was  his 
fieshly  tnother,  making  all  the  faithful  women  severally  his 
mother  or  his  sister,  as  the  case  might  be,  how  can  they  invoke 
her  name  ten  times  for  once  they  invoke  that  of  her  Son,  and 
then  always  to  intercede  for  them  with  her  Son,  as  possessing 
still  fleshly  maternal  authority  with  him!  Is  he  a  Protestant? 
Let  him  show  how  auricular  confession,  transubstantiation,  in- 
vocation of  the  saints,  prayers  for  the  dead,  purgatory,  and 
penance  began,  before  he  perplexes  himself  or  any  one  else 
upon  the  question.  How  originated  infant  ablution? 

Dr.  Miller's  tenth  argument  in  favour  of  infant  baptism,  as 
reported  from  his  own  book  in  our  last  essay,  is — "Finally,  the 
history  of  the  Christian  church  from  the  apostolic  age  furnishes  an 
argument  of  irresistible  ibrce  in  favour  of  the  Divine  authority 
of  infant  baptism."  From  the  documentary  evidence  we  have 
furnished  from  the  history  of  the  Christian  church,  may  we  not 
now  ask,  not  only  tlic  reader  of  Dr.  Miller's  book,  but  Dr.  Miller 
himself,  Whether  Leo  X.  or  Pius  lA".,  both  old  bachelors,  might 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  351 

not,  with  equal  show  of  reason  and  evidence,  have  said,  ^^  Finally ^ 
the  history  of  the  church  f^om  the  apostolic  age  furnishes  an  argu- 
ment of  irresistible  force  in  favour  oftlie  divine  authority  of  sacer- 
dotal celibacy,  of  the  sanctity  of  virginity,  and  the  sublime  excellency 
of  a  monastic  life  J' 

Dr.  Miller's  logic  is  evidently  at  fault  here,  as  in  some  other 
points.  His  witnesses  prove  too  much  for  him ;  and  vrould,  if 
he  dare  listen  to  them  to  the  end  of  their  testimony,  compel  him 
to  become  the  advocate  of  an  unmarried  ministry,  and  of  the 
paramount  purity  of  monks,  and  friars,  and  vestal  nuns.  He 
has  as  venerable,  as  learned,  and  as  numerous  a  host  of  eccle- 
siastic fathers,  confessors,  and  historians  in  favour  of  clerical 
celibacy  as  in  favour  of  infant  baptism, — nay,  I  vrill  strongly 
affirm,  a  much  more  numerous  and  powerful  host  in  favour  of 
the  heaven-subduing  grace  of  pure  virginity,  sanctified  at  the 
altar  of  the  church,  than  he  or  any  other  man  on  this  continent 
can  adduce  in  favour  of  infant  afiusion  or  infant  baptism. 

If,  then,  the  number  or  reputation  of  the  authorities,  ac- 
cording to  Dr.  Miller,  renders  the  argument  from  church 
history  ^  irresistible^'  as  respects  the  divine  authority  of  infant 
baptism ;  the  argument  from  church  history  must  be  equally 
irresistible  in  favour  of  monkery  and  an  unmarried  priesthood : 
for  we  have  all  the  same  authorities,  and  a  few  more  of  as  high, 
if  not  of  a  still  higher  reputation  than  they,  in  favour  of  the 
most  baseless,  most  unreasonable,  most  desolating  tenet  of 
Popery — the  heaven-subduing  potency  of  perpetual  bachelor- 
ship or  celibacy,  and  its  indispensability  to  the  efficacious  ad- 
ministration of  ecclesiastical  institutions,  and  to  the  virtue  of 
prayers,  penances,  and  intercessions. 


352  REVIEWS  OP  THE 


CHAPTER  IV. 

REVIEW   or   PROFESSOR   MILLER  OF   PRINCETON;    DR.  TTALL,  TICAR 
OF   SHOREM,  IN   KENT,  AND   OTHERS. 

Having  already  given  a  fair,  and,  I  think,  ample  specimen  of 
the  value  of  the  testimony  of  those  "Fathers"  mainly  relied  on 
by  the  most  learned  and  influential  of  the  advocates  of  infant 
baptism,  I  intend  to  occupy  not  many  more  pages  on  the  argu- 
ment drawn  from  tradition,  oral  or  written.  We  must  logically 
and  morally  discriminate  between  the  testimony  of  the  Greek 
and  Roman  Fathers  concerning  facts  and  events  extant  or  trans- 
piring in  their  own  times,  and  their  own  opinions  touching  those 
facts  and  events.  It  is  as  much  a  fact  that  a  certain  opinion 
was  entertained  or  propagated  by  a  Tertullian,  an  Origen,  or  a 
Cyprian,  as  that  such  men  lived  in  the  third  century.  It  may 
also  be  a  fact  that  they  entertained  such  an  opinion,  or  that  they 
did  not;  but  neither  the  fact  of  their  entertaining  or  not  enter- 
taining any  given  opinion  is  any  proof  to  us  or  to  their  contempo- 
raries of  the  truth  or  the  falsehood  of  such  an  opinion. 

The  fact  that  infant  communion  was  as  common  as  infant 
baptism  in  the  ^^ ancient  church"  and  that  it  was  plead  for  by 
such  men  as  Photius,  Cyprian,  Augustine,  &c.,  should  be,  me- 
thinks,  a  sufficient  reproof  to  all  Protestants,  at  least,  for  their 
implicit  admission  of  the  testimony  of  certain  Greek  Fathers  as 
to  the  existence  of  an  opinion  in  favour  of  infant  baptism,  or 
of  the  fact  that  some  infants  had  been  baptized  in  the  third 
century.  And  certainly  there  is  still  more  incongruity  in  ad- 
ministering the  elements  commemorative  of  the  Saviour's  sacri- 
ficial death  to  an  unconscious,  unthinking  babe,  than  in  either 
sprinkling  water  upon  its  face,  or  in  immersing  it  in  water  into 
the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  Still,  in 
defiance  of  all  reason,  propriety,  and  the  total  absence  of  all 
scriptural  authority,  the  whole  Greek  church  and  the  whole 
Roman  church  admit  infants  to  the  eucharist;  or,  as  some  semi- 
protestants  call  it,  the  sacrament  of  the  supper.  If,  then.  Dr. 
Wall  and  Dr.  Miller — if  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  and  all 
Pedobaptists  receive  as  authorities  ancient  opinions,  or  the  testi- 
mony of  Greek  and  Roman  Fathers  as  to  the  existence  of  opinions 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  353 

and  practices  in  their  times,  in  evidence  of  the  Divine  and  apos- 
tolic authority  of  infant  baptism,  why  repudiate  their  own  wit- 
nesses when  they  equally  depose  in  favour  of  infant  communion? 
"Why  administer  the  one  "sacrament'^  to  babes,  and  withhold 
from  them  the  other  "  sacrament,"  having  as  good  authority  for 
the  one  as  for  the  other?  Nay,  better  for  infant  communion 
than  for  infant  baptism — because  infants  ate  the  passover,  which 
they  say  was  the  prototype  and  precedent  of  the  supper. 

But  as  they  are  bold,  we  must  be  bold  also.  ^Ye  affirm,  and 
I  know  that  our  opponents  dare  not  deny  it,  that  not  one  of  the 
five  "  Apostolic  Fathers" — Barnabas,  Clement  of  Rome,  Hermas, 
Ignatius,  or  Polycarp — either  name  or  allude  to  infant  baptism, 
or  say  any  thing  that  would  imply  it ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  say 
that  which  implies  believer  baptism,  and  believer  baptism  only. 
Neither  do  the  oldest  of  the  Greek  Fathers — Papias,  Dionysius 
of  Corinth,  Tatian,  Melito,  Ireneeus,  Theophilus,  or  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  name  it.  Nor,  indeed,  does  Justin  Martyr  indicate 
the  existence  of  the  rite  in  his  time.  He  is,  however,  the  first 
of  Dr.  WalFs  cloud  of  historic  witnesses  of  the  opinions  on  the 
subject.  Certain  it  is,  that  Justin  Martyr  does  not  once  name 
infant  baptism.  On  the  contrary,  his  history  of  Christianity  in 
the  second  century  forbids  the  assumption.  His  words  are — (I 
have  the  Greek  before  me,  but  will  give  Dr.  Wall's  own  version 
of  them) — "  Those  who  are  persuaded  and  do  believe  those  things 
which  are  taught  by  us  are  true,  and  do  promise  to  live  accord- 
ing to  them,  are  directed  first  to  pray  and  ask  of  God,  with 
fasting,  the  forgiveness  of  their  former  sins  ;  and  we  also  pray 
and  fast  together  with  them.*  Then  we  bring  them  to  some 
place  where  there  is  water, f  and  they  are  regenei^ated  by  the 
same  way  of  regeneration  by  which  we  were  regenerated;  for  they 
are  washed  with  water  in  the  name  of  God,  the  Father  and  Lord 
of  all  things,  and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  For  Christ  says,  unless  you  be  regenerated  you  cannot 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven :  and  everybody  knows  it  is 
impossible  for  those  that  are  once  generated,  or  born,  to  enter 
again  into  their  mother's  womb." — "  The  washing  is  called  the 
enlightening,"  &c.  Dr.  Wall  argues  from  this  passage  that  the 
ancient  church  regarded  baptism  as  regeneration,  and  as  com- 

*  Very  like  the  actions  of  infants. 

f  We  are  more  courteous  than  Justin  Martyr's  Christians.    We  bring  the  water 
to  the  infants,  but  they  carried  the  infants  to  the  water ! 

SO* 


854  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

monly  called  it  *  regenefratum!  as  the  Episcopalians  call  it  'ckrisienr 
ingJ  But,  waiving  all  criticism  on  the  propriety  of  this  language, 
we  only  ask,  Hovr  does  all  this  prove  infant  baptism  ?  Does  not 
the  whole  passage  cited  clearly  intimate  that  the  subjects  of 
Justin  Martyr's  baptism  were  believers,  and  had  agreed  to  live 
according  to  Christ's  will,  before  they  took  them  to  the  water  ?* 

But  the  advocates  of  infant  baptism  will  concede  this,  and  flee 
to  another  passage  from  the  same  author  as  directly  favouring 
their  theory.  They  quote  a  few  words  from  Justin^s  First  Apo- 
logy. The  passage  already  read  is  from  his  Second  Apology. 
We  shall  hear  that  portion  from  his  First  Apology  : — "  Several 
persons  among  us,  of  sixty  and  seventy  years  old,  of  both  sexes, 
who  were  discipled  (or  made  disciples)  to  Christ  in  or  from  their 
childhood,  do  continue  uncorrupted  (or  virgins). '^  "From 
childhood" — not  from  infancy.  In  the  original  Greek  of  Justin 
it  is  ek  paidoon,  which  indicates  from  ten  to  fifteen,  rather  than 
from  eight  days  to  two  years.  There  is  not,  then,  any  authority 
whatever  for  assuming  Justin  Martyr  as  a  witness  in  favour  of 
infant  baptism.  It  cannot  be  logically  or  philologically  deduced 
from  any  thing  I  have  ever  seen  quoted  from  him. 

Unless,  then,  we  assume  that  to  be  regenerated  means  neither 
more  nor  less  than  to  be  baptize^,  there  is  no  Greek  Father,  no 
Apostolic  Father,  no  ecclesiastic  vrriter,  who  so  much  as  names 
baptism  in  connection  with  infants  before  the  third  century. 
Nor,  indeed,  do  they  ever  speak  of  regenerated  infants.  The 
Greeks  have  four  words  for  children.  They  have  hrephos,  a 
babe  ;  paidion,  a  little  child ;  teknion,  a  little  child  figuratively ; 
and  pais,  a  youth,  a  stripling,  any  one  under  age.  Now  it 
happens  that  neither  Dr.  Wall  nor  Dr.  Miller,  nor  any  of  those 
special  pleaders  for  infant  baptism,  seem  to  know,  and  certainly 
do  not  make  knoAvn  to  others,  the  fact  which  I  have  now  stated : 
nay,  they  assume,  without  the  shadow  of  proof,  that  j)ais  must 
mean,  in  the  New  Testament,  or  in  the  style  of  the  Greek 
Fathers,  an  infant ;  that  is,  a  brepJios,  or  babe  ;  and  this,  too,  in 
the  face  of  the  fact  that  we  have  these  four  words  frequently  in 
the  New  Testament  Greek,  and  wherever  we  find  a  literal  babe 
or  infant  in  the  New  Testament,  we  find  brephos  in  the  original ; 
and  wherever  literal  little  children  are  spoken  of,  we  have  in  no 
case  pais,  but  always  paidion  or  teknion. 

*  WaJl's  History  of  Infant  Baptism,  vol.  i,  pp.  67,  70,  Oxford  edition,  1836. 


.      ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  355 

With  regard  to  pais,  the  word  used  by  Justin  Martyr,  in  his 
Second  Apology,  on  which  Dr.  Wall  and  others  so  much  rely,  it 
is  applied  to  persons  of  from  twelve  to  thirty  years  of  age  in  the 
New  Testament.  Jesus,  at  the  age  of  twelve,  and  after  he  had 
risen  from  the  dead,  is  called  pais.  Acts  iv.  27.  Eutychus,  a 
young  man,  mentioned  Acts  xx.  12,  is  represented  by  the  word 
pais.     So  of  others  from  twelve  to  twenty  years  old. 

Of  the  Greek  Fathers  of  this  era  we  have  none  other  quoted 
by  Dr.  Wall  or  Dr.  Miller.  Tertullian  is  the  first  of  the  Latin 
writers  who  early  in  the  third  century  mentions  infant  baptism. 
He  does,  indeed,  name  it ;  but  I  have  long  since  said,  and  no 
one  has  as  yet  presumed  to  refute  it,  that  he  opposes  it  as  an  in- 
novation. Dr.  Miller  says — *'  Tertullian,  about  two  hundred 
years  after  the  birth  of  Christ,  is  the  first  man  of  whom  we  read 
in  ecclesiastical  history,  as  speaking  a  word  against  infant  bap- 
tism." Well,  uncandid  as  this  is,  we  must  request  our  readers 
to  remember  that  Dr.  Miller  says  Tertullian  spoke  against  it. 
But  he  says  he  is  the^r^^  man  that  spoke  against  it.  And  who, 
we  might  ask,  was  the  first  person  that  spoke  for  it  ?  Any  one 
before  Tertullian  ?  If  any  one,  his  name  has  not  reached  us  ! 
But  what  is  the  professor's  solution  of  this  case  ?  Why  did 
Tertullian  speak  against  it  ?  Hear  him : — "  Tertullian  adopted 
the  superstitious  idea  that  baptism  was  accompanied  with  the 
remission  of  all  past  sins."^  And  who  of  his  predecessors  or 
contemporaries  did  not  teach  the  same  "  superstitious  idea  ?" 
Who  did  not  also,  according  to  Dr.  Wall,  adopt  a  still  more  su- 
perstitious idea,  that  baptism  and  regen£ration  were  convertible 
terms — perfect  and  complete  equivalents  ? — and  that  there  was 
not  one  writer  during  the  first  four  centuries  that  understood 
baptism  as  any  thing  else  but  regeneration ! !  And  did  not  all 
of  them,  as  well  as  Tertullian,  teach  "that sins  committed  after 
baptism  were  peculiarly  dangerous?"  These  are  Pedobaptist 
assertions — not  ours. 

Tertullian' s  views  may  be  gathered  from  the  extracts  found 
in  Wall's  history  of  infant  baptism.  *'  They  who  administer 
baptism,"  says  Tertullian,  "  are  to  know  that  it  must  not  be 
given  rashly."  "  '  Give  to  every  one  that  asketh  thee,^  has  its 
proper  subject,  and  relates  to  almsgiving  ;  but  that  command  is 
rather  here  to  be  considered  ;  '  Give  not  that  which  is  holy  to 

*  Miller  on  Baptism,  page  32. 


356  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

dogs,  neither  cast  your  pearls  before  swine ;'  and  that,  '  Lay 
hands  suddenly  on  no  man,  neither  be  partakers  of  other 
men's  sins.'  Therefore  according  to  every  one's  condition  and 
disposition,  and  also  their  age,  the  delaying  of  baptism  is  more 
profitable,  especially  in  the  case  of  little  children.  For  what 
need  is  there  that  the  god-fathers  should  be  brought  into  dan- 
ger ?  because  they  may  either  fail  of  their  promises  by  death,  or 
they  may  be  mistaken  by  a  child's  proving  of  wicked  disposi- 
tion. Our  Lord  says,  indeed,  '  Do  not  forbid  them  to  come  to 
me ;'  therefore,  let  them  come  ivhen  they  are  grown  up — let  them 
come  when  they  understand.  When  they  are  instructed  whither 
it  is  that  they  come,  let  them  be  made  Christians,  when 
they  can  know  Christ.  What  need  their  guiltless  age  make 
such  haste  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins  ?  Men  will  proceed  more 
warily  in  worldly  goods  ;  and  he  that  should  not  have  earthly 
goods  committed  to  him,  yet  shall  have  heavenly  ! !  Let  them 
know  how  to  desire  this  salvation,  that  you  may  appear  to  have 
given  it  to  one  that  asketh."  I  wonder  not  that  any  one  who 
calmly  and  dispassionately  reads  even  so  much  as  we  have 
quoted  from  TertuUian's  writings,  and  more  especially  if  he 
have  patience  to  read  so  much  of  them  as  is  found  in  Du  Pin, 
or  even  Dr.  Wall,  should  conclude  with  Richard  Baxter,  saying, 
"  Yet  again  will  I  confess  that  the  words  of  Tertullian  and  of 
Nazianzen  show  that  it  was  a  long  time  before  all  ivere  agreed  of 
the  very  time,  or  of  the  necessity  of  baptizing  infants  before  any 
use  of  reason,  in  case  they  were  to  live  to  maturity." 

Can  any  one  think — I  mean  any  one  free  from  prejudice — 
that  had  infant  baptism  been  an  apostolic  institution  preached 
from  the  beginning,  any  men  of  learning  in  the  age  of  Tertul- 
lian would  have  so  written  about  it  as  here  reported  by  his 
friends  and  the  friends  of  that  institution?  We  cheerfully  ad- 
mit the  probability  that  infant  immersion,  god-fathers,  infant 
communion,  monkery,  &c.  &c.  commenced  about  the  times  of 
Tertullian  and  St.  Cyprian,  in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century. 
This  will,  however,  appear  still  more  evident  from  the  decision 
of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  composed  of  sixty-six  bishops,  which 
met  Anno  Domini  253,  to  deliberate  on  certain  queries  referred 
to  it  by  Bishop  Fidus  ;  one  of  which  was,—"  Whether  an  infant, 
before  it  was  eight  days  old,  might  be  baptized,  if  need  required^" 

We  shall  give  a  few  extracts  from  this  celebrated  response 
of  the  Council  to  the  query  sent   up  to  Carthage   by   Bishop 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  357 

Fidus :— "  We  read  your  letter,  most  dear  brother,  in  which  you 
write  of  one  rector  or  priest,  &c.  But  as  to  the  case  of  infants : 
whereas  you  judge  that  they  must  not  be  baptized  within  two 
or  three  days  after  they  are  born ;  and  that  the  rule  of  circum- 
cision is  to  be  observed,  so  that  none  should  be  baptized  and 
sanctified  before  the  eighth  day  after  he  is  born ;  we  were  all  in 
the  assembly  of  the  contrary  opinion.  We  have  judged  that  the 
grace  and  mercy  of  God  are  to  be  denied  to  no  person  that  is 
born.  For  whereas  our  Lord  in  the  gospel  says,  *  The  Son  of 
Man  came  not  to  destroy  men's  souls,  or  lives ;  but  to  save 
them :'  as  far  as  lies  in  us,  no  soul,  if  possible,  is  to  be  lost. 
For  what  is  there  deficient  in  him  who  has  been  once  formed  in 
the  womb  by  the  hands  of  God  V — "  All  things  that  are  made 
by  God  are  perfect  by  the  work  and  power  of  God  their  Maker. 
The  Scripture  gives  us  to  understand  the  equality  of  the  divine 
gift  on  all,  whether  infants  or  grown  persons.  Elisha,  in  his 
prayer  to  God,  stretched  himself  on  the  infant  son  of  the  Shuna- 
mite  woman  who  lay  dead,  in  such  a  manner  that  his  head,  and 
face,  and  limbs,  and  feet  were  applied  to  the  head,  face,  limbs,  and 
feet  of  the  child  ;*  which,  if  it  be  understood  according  to  the 
quality  of  our  body  and  nature,  the  infant  could  not  hold 
measure  with  the  full-grown  man,  nor  its  limbs  fit  and  reach  to 
his  great  ones.  But  in  that  place  a  spiritual  equality,  and  such 
as  is  in  the  esteem  of  God,  is  intimated  to  us  ;  by  which  persons 
that  are  once  made  by  God  are  alike  and  equal.'* 

The  remainder  of  this  letter  is  as  weak  and  childish  as  the 
specimen  before  us,  and  concludes  with  these  words : — "It  is 
not  for  us  to  hinder  any  person  from  baptism  and  the  grace  of 
God,  who  is  merciful  and  kind  and  afi'ectionate  to  all.  To  in- 
fants our  help  and  the  divine  mercy  are  rather  to  be  granted, 
because,  by  their  weeping  and  wailing  at  their  first  entrance 
into  the  world,  they  do  intimate  nothing  so  much  as  that  they 
implore  compassion." 

Such  was  the  wisdom,  and  learning,  and  good  sense  of  the 
African  council  of  sixty-six  Bishops,  who  decreed  that  infants 
should  be  baptized  as  soon  as  born ;  and  that,  too,  in  a.  d.  253. 
From  such  a  council  who  could  expect  a  more  sage  conclusion 
or  a  higher  authority  than  that  of  Elisha  stretching  himself  down 
to  the  dimensions  of  an  infant !     High  authority,  indeed,  and  is 

*  strange  stretchiDg,  this !    We  would  rather  say,  contracting  himself. 


358  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

only  surpassed  by  the  following  passage',  which,  so  far  as  argu- 
ment is  concerned,  embraces  the  remainder  of  the  letter: — "  If 
the  greatest  offenders,  and  they  that  have  grievously  sinned 
against  God  before,  have,  when  they  afterward  come  to  believe, 
forgiveness  of  their  sins  ;  and  no  person  is  kept  off  from  baptism 
and  the  grave  ;  how  much  less  reason  is  there  to  refuse  an  in- 
fant, who,  being  newly  born,  has  no  sin,  save  that,  being  de- 
scended from  Adam  according  to  the  flesh,  he  has  from  his  very 
birth  contracted  the  contagion  of  the  death  anciently  threatened  ; 
who  comes  for  this  reason  more  easily  to  receive  forgiveness  of 
sins,  because  they  are  not  his  own,  but  others'  sins  that  are  for- 
given him/^  Such  the  philosophy,  the  reason,  and  the  authority 
of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  and  such  the  character  of  the  third 
century  and  its  bishops  !  An  age  and  a  people  peculiarly  quali- 
fied to  introduce  and  ordain  infant  baptism. 

"We  will  not  weary  our  readers  with  any  more  such  extracts 
from  the  men  who  afterwards  plead  for  infant  baptism.  Nor 
do  we  at  all  deem  it  essential  to  trace  the  history  of  infant  bap- 
tism or  that  of  infant  communion,  of  godfathers,  and  all  the 
other  appendages  of  this  human  tradition.  We  concede,  with- 
out a  demur,  that,  in  the  Greek  and  the  Koman  church,  whether 
in  Africa,  Asia,  or  Europe,  infant  baptism,  with  its  kindred  ac- 
companiments of  sponsors,  the  salt,  the  spittle,  and  the  oil ; 
together  with  monachism,  with  all  its  forms ;  and  virginity,  with 
all  its  potency  on  earth  and  in  heaven,  not  only  existed,  but  in 
triumph  reigned  for  more  than  twelve  hundred  years.  Infant 
baptism,  with  its  other  accompaniments,  has  been  gradually 
losing  its  power  over  the  human  mind ;  and,  in  every  conflict 
with  those  who  repudiate  it  as  a  papal  tradition,  it  has  uni- 
formly fallen  in  public  favour,  and  is  ever  making  unsuccessful 
aggressions  upon  those  who  seek  to  find  for  it  either  precept  or 
example  in  all  the  written  records  of  Prophets  and  Apostles. 

Still,  in  every  century  from  the  times  of  Tertullian  till  now, 
there  have  been  many  witnesses  for  the  Apostolic  baptism.  A 
host  of  learned  and  pious  men  have  in  all  ages  stood  up  as  re- 
monstrants against  the  pretensions  of  those  who  sought  for 
infant  baptism  any  other  warrant  than  the  doctrines  and  com- 
mandments of  men.  A  few  notices  of  those  distinguished  men 
who,  in  word  and  deed,  testified  against  it,  arc  all  that  we  have 
room  for  in  these  essays. 

Of  distinguished  men  in  the  third  century,  the  celebrated  Bax- 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  359 

ter  says,  that  "Tertullian,  Origen,  and  Cyprian,  who  lived  in 
the  second  and  third  centuries,  do  affirm  that  in  the  primitive 
times  none  vrere  baptized  but  such  as  engaged  themselves  to 
obey  him/'     Saint's  Rest,  1st.  ed.,  chap.  8, 

Fourth  Century. — Jerome  says,  "The  Lord  commanded  his 
Apostles  that  they  should  first  instruct  and  teach  all  nations, 
and  afterwards  should  baptize  them  that  were  instructed  in  the 
mysteries  of  the  faith ;  for  it  cannot  be  that  the  body  should 
receive  the  ordinance  of  baptism  before  the  soul  has  received  the 
true  faith."  Jerome's  Comment  on  Matt,  xxvii.  19,  20.  Atha- 
nasius,  in  his  third  sermon  against  the  Arians,  says,  "  Our  Sa- 
viour hath  not  simply  commanded  to  baptize ;  but  first  said  teach, 
then  baptize ;  because  true  faith  proceeds  from  teaching,  and 
baptism  rightly  follows  faith."     See  Merningus,  part  2,  p.  370. 

"Epiphanius,  Bishop  of  Cyprus,  was  baptized  upon  a  profes- 
sion of  his  faith,  and  did  afterwards  assert  for  doctrine  that 
none  ought  to  be  baptized  but  such."  See  Metaphrastes,  1.  1, 
chap.  30 ;  and  Mem.  p.  336,  as  quoted  by  Junius. 

During  this  century,  there  were  sundry  councils  and  synods. 
The  Council  of  Laodicea,  of  Neocesarea,  and  the  synods  of  this 
time  agreed  in  this,  that  "whosoever  were  to  be  baptized  should 
give  in  their  names,  and  then,  after  due  examination,  should  be 
baptized.  And  not  only  great  men,  and  even  princes,  converted 
from  paganism,  were  baptized ;  but  even  the  sons  and  daugh- 
ters of  believing  parents  were  baptized  when  arrived  at  adult 
years."  A  clear  proof  that  infant  baptism  had  not  yet  become 
general ;  for  the  children  of  believing  parents  would  certainly 
have  been  baptized,  had  any  infants  in  ordinary  cases  been  bap- 
tized. Amongst  the  vast  numbers  of  the  children  of  believers 
that  were  baptized  in  adult  years,  during  this  century,  we  shall 
mention  a  few  men  of  renown.  Basil  the  Great,  son  of  a  Chris- 
tian bishop,  was  baptized  in  the  Jordan,  when  advanced  in 
years..  Gregory,  son  of  Gregory  Bishop  of  Nazianzen,  was  bap- 
tized at  the  age  of  twenty.  Constantino  the  Great,  a  Briton 
born,  and  King  of  England,  son  of  Helena,  a  zealous  Christian, 
was  well  advanced  in  years  before  he  was  baptized.  During  his 
reign,  most  of  his  British  troops  were  Christians,  a.  d.  320. 
Ambrose  refused  to  be  baptized  till  he  was  chosen  Bishop  of 
Milan.  Chrysostom  was  born  of  believing  parents,  and  was 
educated  by  Miletus,  a  bishop  ;  yet  he  was  not  baptized  till  the 
age  of  twenty-one.     Hugo  Grotius,  while  saying  this  of  Chry- 


860  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

sostom,  adds,  "Many  of  the  Greeks,  in  every  age,  to  this  day, 
keep  the  custom  of  deferring  the  baptism  of  their  little  ones  till 
they  make  a  profession  of  their  faith."  Erastus  testifies  that 
"Jerome  was  born  in  the  city  of  Shy  don,  of  Christian  parents; 
was  brought  up  in  the  Christian  religion,  and  was  baptized  in 
the  thirtieth  year  of  his  age."  "Austin,  the  son  of  the  gra- 
cious Monica,  being  instructed  in  the  faith,  was  not  baptized  till 
thirty."  See  Osiander's  Book,  cent.  4,  1.  3,  p.  371-380 ;  also 
Nauclerus,  a.  d.  391.  Historia  Tripartita  tells  us,  that  "Theo- 
dosius,  the  emperor,  was  born  in  Spain,  and  his  parents  were 
both  Christians  ;  that  he  was  instructed  in  the  Christian  faith; 
and,  falling  sick  at  Thessalonica,  he  was  baptized  by  Achalis." 
See  Dr.  Taylor,  lib.  Proph.  p.  239. 

I  cannot  close  the  testimonies  of  the  fourth  century  better 
than  by  presenting  to  the  reader  the  words  of  Dr.  Barlow,  Doc- 
tor of  the  Chair  at  Oxford — a  man  eminent  for  learning.  On 
reviewing  the  records  of  antiquity  and  the  arguments  of  his 
Pedobaptist  friends,  in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  he  says,  "I  do  be- 
lieve and  know  that  there  is  neither  precept  nor  example  for 
infant  baptism,  nor  any  just  evidence  for  it  for  above  205  years 
after  Christ ;  that  TertuUian  condemns  it  as  an  unwarrantable 
practice.  I  have  read  what  my  learned  friends,  Dr.  Hammond 
and  Mr.  Baxter,  and  others,  say  in  the  defence  of  it ;  and  I  con- 
fess I  wonder  not  a  little  that  men  of  such  great  parts  should 
Bay  so  much  to  so  little  purpose ;  for  I  have  twt  as  yet  seen 
any  thing  like  an  argument  fw  it"  Thus  far  Doctor  Barlow, 
Jun.  69. 

Fifth  Century. — In  this  age,  there  were  many  public  advo- 
cates of  the  true  baptism.  Chrysostom,  whose  baptism  we  men- 
tioned in  the  last  century,  in  the  fifth  century  publicly  taught 
that  "  the  time  of  grace  (or  when  a  man  obtained  grace)  or  con- 
version, was  the  only  fit  time  for  baptism,  which,"  says  he, 
**  was  the  season  in  which  the  three  thousand  in  Acts  ii.,  and 
others  afterwards,  were  baptized."     See  Magd.  cent.  5,  p.  368. 

Faustus  Regiensis,  a  bishop  in  France,  taught  in  this  age, 
that  "  the  will  and  desire  of  the  party  that  comes  to  be  baptized 
are  necessary." 

Evegrius  says,  that  "  they  who  have  been  instructed  in  the 
word  of  God  were  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism."  See  Mer- 
ningus,  p.  421-425. 

Sixth  Century. — Gregory  says,  "In  baptism  tlie  elect  receive 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  361 

the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  whereby  also  their  spirits  or  understand- 
ings are  enlightened  in  the  Scriptures,  and  that  by  faith  in  the 
death  of  Christ,  by  baptism,  their  sins  are  forgiven."  "  In  this 
century,  the  Council  of  Agather  decreed,  that  the  articles  of 
faith  he  Jlrst  preached  to  the  persons  to  be  baptized,  before 
they  are  baptized."     Vicecome's  History,  p.  482. 

Seventh  Century. — In  this  age,  the  Bracarens  Council,  in  Spain, 
decreed,  that  "no  adult  persons  but  such  as  had  been  well 
instructed  and  examined,  should  be  baptized."  "  The  Council 
of  Toletanus  express  the  same  import ;  and  we  find  that  Pauli- 
nus  baptized  in  the  River  Trent,  in  England,  a  great  number 
of  men  and  women."  See  Bead.  1.  2,  chap.  16,  cent.  7,  p.  145. 
"  In  Egypt,  in  this  century,  the  Christians  departed  from  the 
faith  of  the  church  of  Rome,  placing  it  upon  the  Apostolic 
foundation,  that  the  person  should  Jirst  believe  before  he  is  bap- 
tized."   Vice.  1.  9,  chap.  3. 

Eighth  Century. — Bede,  who  lived  in  this  century,  page  220, 
says,  "  Men  are  first  to  be  instructed  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,  then  to  be  baptized  as  Christ  has  taught ;  because  that, 
without  faith,  it  is  impossible  to  please  God."  The  learned 
Haime,  on  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  says,  "In  these  words  is  set  down 
the  rule  how  to  baptize — that  is,  that  teaching  should  go  before 
baptism;  that  Christ  says.  Teach  all  nations,  then  baptize:  for  he 
that  is  to  be  baptized  must  first  be  instructed  to  believe  what  he 
in  baptism  shall  receive.  In  this  century,  the  Council  of  Paris 
and  that  of  Laodicea  decreed  that  those  who  are  to  be  baptized 
ought  first  to  be  instructed  in  the  faith,  and  make  a  confession 
of  it." 

Ninth  Century. — Rabanus,  chapter  iv.,  says  that  "the  cate- 
chism, which  is  the  doctrine  of  faith,  must  go  before  baptism ; 
to  the  intent  that  he  who  is  baptized  may  first  learn  the  mys- 
teries of  faith ;  and,"  continues  he,  "  the  Lord  Jesus  anointed 
the  eyes  of  him  that  was  born  blind,  with  clay  made  of  spittle, 
before  he  sent  him  to  the  waters  of  Siloam,  to  signify  that  he 
that  is  to  be  baptized  must  first  see,  or  be  instructed  in  the  faith 
concerning  the  incarnation  of  Christ.  When  he  that  is  in- 
structed doth  believe,  then  he  is  to  be  admitted  to  baptism,  that 
he  might  know  whom  he  afterwards  ought  and,  in  duty,  ia 
bound  to  serve." 

Albinus  says,  "  Three  things  are  visible  in  baptism — the  body, 
the  water,  and  the  administrator ;  and  three  things  invisible- 
si 


362  REVIEWS   OP   THE 

the  soul,  faith,  and  the  Spirit  of  God,  which  are  all  joined  by 
the  word  of  God/'     P.  220. 

Kabanus  likewise  observes,  that  "The  adults  were  first  to  be 
instructed  in  the  faith,  and  duly  examined  before  they  were 
baptized  ;  and  that  as  Noah  and  his  family  were  saved  by  loater 
and  the  ark,  so  the  faithful  are  saved  by  Christ  and  baptism." 
P.  144. 

Tenth  Century. — In  this  age,  Smaragdo,  on  Matt,  xxviii.  19, 
observes,  "Men  are  to  be  taught  in  the  faith,  then  after  to  be 
baptized  therein ;  for  it  is  not  enough  that  the  body  be  bap- 
tized, but  that  the  soul,  by  faith,  j^r*^  receive  the  truth  thereof/' 
P.  187. 

Eleventh  Century. — Anselm  says  that,  "Believers  are  bap- 
tized into  the  death  of  Christ,  that  they,  believing  his  death 
and  conforming  thereto,  may,  as  dying  with  him,  live  also  with 
him/'  P.  169.  Again,  says  he,  "Christian  baptism  is  the 
washing  of  water  into  the  word  of  life.  Take  away  either  the 
water  or  the  word,  baptism  ceaseth.'^  P.  116.  "  In  this  cen- 
tury, the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  loudly  asserted  and  exten- 
sively practised  believer  baptism.'^  Twisk,  Chron.  1.  11,  a.  d. 
1100,  p.  423.  "Peter  Bruise,  a  learned  author  in  Toulouse, 
France,  and  his  numerous  followers,  were  zealous  asserters  and 
practisers  of  baptism  after  faith  and  repentance."  Dutch  Mar. 
chap.  11. 

Twelfth  Century. — Alburtus  Magnus  says,  "  The  laver  of  bap- 
tism is  not  proper  but  to  the  illuminated  and  called,  who  can 
draw  virtue  from  the  death  of  Christ."  Page  413.  Thomas 
Aquinas  says  that  "in  baptism  God  works  inwardly,  as  he  dis- 
penseth  the  ordinance  outwardly  ;  there  is  not  only  a  consecra- 
tion of  the  soul  to  God,  but  the  body ;  because  the  whole  man, 
by  baptism,  is  dedicated  to  God ;  for  by  baptism  we  die  to  the 
life  of  sin,  and  begin  to  live  a  new  life  of  grace."  P.  424.  "  In 
this  century  there  was  a  great  spread  of  those  who  practised  be- 
liever's baptism."  Twisk,  Chron.  1.  13,  pp.  528,  529. 

Thirteeyith  Century. — In  this  century,  Jacob  Merningus  says 
that  "  he  had  in  his  hand,  in  the  German  tongue,  a  Confession 
of  the  Faith  of  the  Baptists,  called  Waldenses,  which  asserts 
that  in  the  beginning  of  Christianity  there  was  no  such  thing  as 
baptizing  infants,  and  that  their  forefathers  practised  no  such 
thing,  as  Johannes  Bohemius  writes  in  his  second  book ;  and 
Merningus'  History  of  Baptism,  part  2d,  page  736."     Moreover, 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  863 

it  is  observed  by  many,  that  "this  faith  and  practice  made  a 
prodigious  spread  through  Poland,  Lombardy,  Germany,  and 
Holland."    Montanus,  p.  86.  Merningus,  p.  737. 

Fourteenth  Century. — In  addition  to  the  evidence  cited  above, 
which  also  bears  upon  this  century,  as,  indeed,  the  documents 
presented  with  respect  to  any  century  always  have  an  important 
bearing  upon  that  immediately  succeeding,  we  find  that  "  Carlos, 
Bishop  of  Meyland,  did  exhort  the  ministers  under  his  charge 
that  they  should  first  teach  the  faith  ;  and  that  only  upon  a  con- 
fession of  faith  and  a  good  conversation  they  should  administer 
baptism."  Merning.  p.  740.  The  confession  of  the  Thabotites, 
in  the  year  1431,  confirms  that  in  this  century  there  were  many 
Baptists,  especially  in  Bohemia.  They  say,  "We  do  from  our 
hearts  acknowledge  that  the  ordinance  of  baptism  is  washing, 
which  is  performed  with  water,  which,  according  to  Christ's 
words,  doth  hold  out  (i.  e.  in  a  figure)  the  washing  of  the  soul 
from  sin  according  to  Christ's  command.'^  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 
Merning.  p.  743. 

Fifteenth  Century. — In  this  century  the  Baptists  spread  amaz- 
ingly. Mem.  p.  772.  Twisk  says,  in  his  Chronology,  page  930, 
that  in  the  year  157,  "the  Waldenses,  who  were  Baptists,  were 
much  spread  in  Hungary."  That  these  Waldenses  were  Bap- 
tists, Montanus,  Impress  2d,  says  that  "  the  Waldenses,  in  the 
public  declarations  of  their  faith  to  the  French  king,  a.  d.  1521, 
assert  in  the  strongest  terms  the  baptizing  of  believers,  and  deny 
that  of  infants."  Balthazer  Lydia  testifies  that  "  at  this  time 
there  were  several  churches  in  Thessalonica,  in  Greece,  supposed 
to  have  continued  successively  from  the  Apostles'  time,  agreeing 
with  the  faith  of  the  Waldenses."  See  B.  L.  Treatise  3,  of  the 
Waldenses.  "Two  persons  were  sent  from  the  churches  in 
Thessalonica  to  find  some  of  the  same  faith  with  themselves ; 
and  -coming  into  Switzerland,  they  were  taken  prisoners  and 
put  into  the  castle  of  Passaw,  who  declared  to  many  that  they 
had  in  their  care  (at  Thessalonica)  the  original  of  Paul's  epis- 
tles, which  he  sent  to  them."  Mern.  page  739. 

Sixteenth  Century. — It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  continue  the 
history  farther  down  than  this  century,  as  almost  every  person 
knows  that  there  were  myriads  of  advocates  for  believer  baptism 
in  this  century.  I  shall,  however,  mention  one  distinguished 
advocate  of  this  cause,  who  flourished  in  this  century.  Jacob 
de  Boor,  a  prisoner  in  Bruges,  in  Flanders,  steadfastly  owned 


364  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

and  maintained  as  follows,  viz.  "  That  the  baptism  which  the 
Apostles  taught  and  practised  must  needs  he  after  believing,  be- 
cause it  is  for  the  burying  of  sin,  the  hath  or  evidence  of  regenc' 
ration,  the  covenant  of  a  Christian's  life,  the  putting  on  the 
body  of  Christ,  and  planting  into  the  true  olive-tree  Christ  Jesus, 
and  for  the  right  entrance  into  the  spiritual  ark,  whereof  Christ 
Jesus  is  the  builder." 

From  the  preceding  documents,  a  mere  sample  of  what  may 
be  gleaned  from  the  pages  of  ecclesiastical  history,  the  observant 
reader  will  readily  see  how  much  credit  is  due  to  the  Princeton 
professor  as  a  lecturer  on  ecclesiastical  history,  when  he  says, 
"It  is  an  undouhted  /acUhat  the  people  known  in  ecclesiastical 
history  under  the  name  of  '  Anabaptists,'  who  arose  in  Germany 
in  the  year  1552,  were  the  very  first  body  of  people  in  the  whole 
Christian  world  who  rejected  the  baptism  of  infants  on  the  prin- 
ciples now  adopted  by  the  Anti-Pedobaptist  body.''  (Page  32.) 
Unless  there  be  some  premeditated  oracular  ambiguity  in  this 
expression,  which  it  would  be  uncharitable  to  suppose,  one  could 
not  easily  make  an  assertion  more  unjustifiable  or  insupporta- 
ble, as  the  documents  I  have  given  fully  show,  and  to  which 
many  more  might  be  added. 

I  have  drawn  upon  my  labours  and  researches  some  twenty- 
seven  years  ago  for  the  above  items,  which,  with  much  toil  and 
more  leisure  than  I  can  now  command,  I  collected  from  reliable 
sources,  for  a  tract  of  some  70  pages,  titled  "  Strictures  on  Three 
Letters  respecting  the  Debate  at  Mount  Pleasant,  published  in  the 
Presbyterian  Magazine:  Philadelphia,  1821: — by  Rev.  Dr.  Sa- 
muel Ralston,  D.D."  These  Strictures,  although  before  that  Rev. 
Doctor  and  others  of  his  party  now  for  more  than  a  quarter  of 
a  century,  have  never  been  responded  to,  so  far  as  I  have  learned ; 
and  the  facts  and  documents  here  furnished  stand  as  yet  uncon- 
tradicted by  the  Pedobaptist  world. 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  365 


CHAPTER  V. 

RETIEW    OF    PROFESSOR    MILLER  OF    PRINCETON  ;'   DR.   WALL,  VICAR 
OF    SHOREM    IN    KENT,    AND    OTHERS. 

It  is  presumed  that  quite  enough  has  been  said  on  the  main 
pillars  of  infant  baptism — its  antiquity  and  generality.  On  the 
same  foundation  stand  five  of  the  seven  sacraments  of  Roman 
Catholicism,  together  with  a  bachelor  priesthood,  and  the  para- 
mount virtues  and  powers  of  celibacy  and  the  monastic  life. 
We  have  also  shown,  I  hope,  to  the  entire  satisfaction  of  every 
honest  mind — of  every  inquirer  after  truth — that  there  has  al- 
ways been,  even  in  the  most  degenerate  days,  a  valiant  band  of 
saints  and  martyrs  bearing  testimony  against  these  encroach- 
ments of  "  THE  MAN  OF  siN^'  upon  the  institutions  of  the  Law- 
giver and  King  of  the  Christian  people.  From  all  of  which  do- 
cumentary argument  and  proof,  we  learn  how  little  credit  is  due 
to  those  most  reputable  "Doctors  of  modern  Divinity^'  who  en- 
deavour to  produce  the  impression  that  the  "  German  Anabap- 
tists'' of  the  16th  century  were  the  first  people  in  the  world  that 
either  opposed  infant  baptism,  or  assumed  the  ground  on  which 
the  present  Immersionists,  commonly  called  Baptists,  raise  their 
banners  and  collect  a  community  for  the  Lord. 

Still,  that  no  point  in  this  controversy  may  be  wholly  over- 
looked or  disparaged  through  apparent  ignorance  or  neglect,  I 
think  it  expedient  to  say  a  few  words  upon  the  ancient,  though 
not  primitive,  institution  of  the  catechumens.  By  the  catechu- 
mens we  mean  those  children  admitted  into  the  schools  of  the 
ancient  church  for  the  purpose  of  being  prepared  to  make  an  in- 
telligent profession  of  Christianity.  That  all  our  readers  may 
have  an  impartial  history  of  them,  I  quote  the  whole  article 
concerning  them  from  Buck's  Theological  Dictionary,  which  I 
find  generally  quoted  in  Dictionaries  and  Encyclopedias  of  more 
modern  date : — 

"  Catechumens,  the  lowest  order  of  Christians  in  the  primitive 
church.  They  had  some  title  to  the  common  name  of  Christians, 
being  a  degree  above  pagans  and  heretics,  though  not  consum- 
mated by  baptism.  They  were  admitted  to  the  state  of  catechu- 
mens by  the  imposition  of  hands  and  the  sign  of  the  cross. 
The -children  of  believing  parents  were  admitted  catechumens 
as  soon  as  ever  they  were  capable  of  instruction ;  but  at  what 

SI* 


866  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

age  those  of  heathen  parents  might  be  admitted  is  not  so  clear. 
As  to  the  time  of  their  continuance  in  this  state,  there  were  no 
general  rules  fixed  about  it ;  but  the  practice  varied  according 
to  the  difference  of  times  and  places,  and  the  readiness  and  pro- 
ficiency of  t]je  catechumens  themselves.  There  were  four  orders, 
or  degrees  of  catechumens.  The  first  were  those  instructed  pri- 
vately without  the  church,  and  kept  at  a  distance,  for  some 
time,  from  the  privilege  of  entering  the  church,  to  make  them 
the  more  eager  and  desirous  of  it.  The  next  degree  were  the 
candidates,  so  called  for  their  being  admitted  to  hear  sermons 
and  the  Scriptures  read  in  the  church,  but  were  not  allowed  to 
partake  of  the  prayers.  The  third  sort  of  catechumens  were  the 
gemifcctentes,  so  called  because  they  received  imposition  of 
hands  kneeling.  The  fourth  order  was  the  conipetenies  et  electi ; 
denoting  the  immediate  candidates  for  baptism,  or  such  as  were 
appointed  to  be  baptized  the  next  approaching  festival ;  before 
which,  strict  examination  was  made  into  their  proficiency,  un- 
der the  several  stages  of  catechetical  exercises. 

"After  examination,  they  were  exercised  for  twenty  days  to- 
gether, and  were  obliged  to  fasting  and  confession.  Some  days 
before  baptism  they  went  veiled  ;  and  it  was  customary  to  touch 
their  ears,  saying,  Ephphatha, — i.  e.,  Be  opened  ;  as  also  to  anoint 
their  eyes  with  clay:  both  ceremonies  being  in  imitation  of  our 
Saviour's  practice,  and  intended  to  signify  to  the  catechumens 
their  condition  both  before  and  after  their  admission  into  the 
Christian  church." 

If,  then,  infant  baptism  had  been  the  custom  of  the  primitive 
church,  I  ask  these  hoary  doctors  of  modern  divinity,  how  could  it 
have  happened  that  schools  were  so  early,  even  in  their  "  ancient 
church,"  established  for  preparing  children  for  baptism  by  induct- 
ing them  into  the  knowledge  of  the  facts,  precepts,  and  promises 
of  Christianity?  Can  any  one  of  these  defenders  of  the  high 
antiquity  of  infant  baptism  give  a  good  reason  for  such  schools  ? 
Yes,  says  one  of  the  most  ingenious  of  them,  they  were  insti- 
tuted for  heathen  children  !  Whether  to  ascribe  this  dogma  to 
his  temerity  or  to  his  intractability,  I  know  not ;  but  this  I 
know,  that  he  has  read  ecclesiastical  history  to  little  account  who 
assumes  this  attitude  on  this  question.  Surely  every  mere  tyro 
in  ecclesiastic  learning  remembers  the  case  of  the  celebrated 
St.  Augustine,  born  in  Tagasta,  354 ;  who,  by  "  his  Christian 
mother  Monica,  was  placed  among  the  catechumens ;"  so  that, 
Bays  Du  Pin,  "  falling  dangerously  sick,  he  earnestly  desired  to 
be  baptized  ;"  but  was  not  then,  till  l)etter  educated  !  !  For,  ac- 
cording to  the  rule  of  the  church,  "  catechumens  were  not  to  be 
prayed  for  who  died  Avithout  baptism." 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  867 

Dr.  Mosheim  assigns  to  these  catechumens  a  place  in  the  in- 
stitutions of  the  first  century.     His  words  are — 

"Whoever  acknowledged  Christ  as  the  Saviour  of  mankind, 
and  made  a  solemn  profession  of  his  confidence  in  him,  was 
immediately  baptized  and  received  into  the  church.  But,  in 
process  of  time,  when  the  church  began  to  flourish,  and  its 
members  to  increase,  it  was  thought  prudent  and  necessary  to 
divide  Christians  into  two  orders,  distinguished  by  the  names 
of  believers  and  catecMmiens.  The  former  were  those  who  had 
been  solemnly  admitted  into  the  church  by  baptism,  and  in  con- 
sequence thereof  were  instructed  in  all  the  mysteries  of  religion, 
had  access  to  all  the  parts  of  divine  worship,  and  were  authorized 
to  vote  in  the  ecclesiastical  assemblies.  The  latter  were  such 
as  had  not  been  dedicated  to  God  and  Christ  by  baptism ;  and 
were,  therefore,  admitted  neither  to  the  public  prayers,  nor  to 
the  holy  communion,  nor  to  the  ecclesiastical  assemblies." 

Again  he  says — 

"In  the  earliest  times  of  the  church,  all  who  professed  firmly 
to  believe  that  Jesus  was  the  only  Redeemer  of  the  world,  and 
who,  in  consequence  of  this  profession,  promised  to  live  in  a 
manner  conformable  to  the  purity  of  his  holy  religion,  were  im- 
mediately received  among  the  disciples  of  Christ.  This  was  all 
the  preparation  for  baptism  then  required ;  and  a  more  accurate 
instruction  in  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  was  to  be  adminis- 
tered to  them  after  their  receiving  that  sacrament." 

Again — "The  methods  of  instructing  the  catechumens  difi'ered 
according  to  their  various  capacities.  Those  in  whom  the 
natural  force  of  reason  was  small,  were  taught  no  more  than 
the  fundamental  principles  and  truths,  which  are,  as  it  were, 
the  basis  of  Christianity.  Those,  on  the  contrary,  whom  their 
instructors  judged  capable  of  comprehending,  in  some  measure, 
the  whole  system  of  Divine  truth,  were  furnished  with  superior 
degrees  of  knowledge;  and  nothing  was  concealed  from  them 
which  could  have  aily  tendency  to  render  them  firm  in  their 
profession  and  to  assist  them  in  arriving  at  Christian  per- 
fection. The  care  of  instructing  such  was  committed  to  persons 
who  were  distinguished  by  their  gravity  and  wisdom,  and  also 
by  their  learning  and  judgment.  And  from  hence  it  comes  that 
the  ancient  doctors  generally  divide  their  flock  into  two  classes ; 
the  one  comprehending  such  as  were  solidly  and  thoroughly 
instructed;  the  other,  those  who  were  acquainted  with  little 
more  than  the  first  principles  of  religion ;  nor  do  they  deny  that 
the  methods  of  instruction  applied  to  these  two  sorts  of  persons 
were  extremely  difi'erent. 

"  The  Christians  took  all  possible  care  to  accustom  their  children 
to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  to  instruct  them  in  the  doctrines 


868  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

of  their  holy  religion :  and  schools  were  everywhere  erected  for 
this  purpose,  even  from  the  very  commencement  of  the  Christian, 
church/^ 

Is  it  not  clear,  then,  Pedobaptist  historians  being  witness, 
that  pains  were  taken  by  Christian  parents,  even  before  the  first 
century,  to  prepare  their  children  for  baptism?  Were  there,  in 
their  judgment,  tAvo  baptisms — one  for  speechless  babes,  and 
one  for  educated  children  and  adults?  Or  does  any  one  assume 
the  absurd  position  that  the  catechumens  were  the  young  or  old 
children  of  unbelieving  Jews  and  pagans?  This  they  must 
assume,  or  admit  that  the  children  of  Christian  parents  were 
taught  before  they  were  baptized. 

Speaking  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  as  respects  the 
growing  custom  of  baptizing  infants,  the  learned  historian  J.  C. 
J.  Giesler  says,  "The  custom  of  considering  certain  doctrines 
and  rites  as  mysteries  would  naturally  have  some  effect  on  the 
mode  of  admission  to  the  church.  Baptism  was  preceded  by  a 
long  preparatory  course,  during  which  the  catechumens  {cate- 
choumenoi)  were  gradually  led  from  general  religious  and  moral 
truths  to  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Christianity,  by  teachers  ap- 
pointed for  the  purpose,  [catechistes,)  and  must  pass  through 
various  grades  [audientes,  genujiectentes,  competenies)  before 
they  were  deemed  fit  to  be  actually  admitted.  This  course 
usually  occupied  several  years,  and  often  the  catechumens 
voluntarily  deferred  their  baptism  as  long  as  possible,  on  account 
of  the  remission  of  sins  by  which  it  was  accompanied.  Hence, 
it  was  often  necessary  to  baptize  the  sick,  and  in  that  case, 
sprinkling  (baptismus  clinicorum,  ton  klinikon)  was  substituted 
for  the  usual  rite.  The  baptism  of  infants  became  noAv  more 
common.  The  use  of  exorcism  is  distinctly  mentioned,  and  all 
who  had  been  baptized,  even  the  children,  partook  of  the  eucha- 
rist."  We  might  quote  Waddington  and  other  ecclesiastical 
historians  on  our  shelves,  to  the  same  effect;  but  this  would  be 
more  for  display  than  for  edification.  It  is,  we  think,  already 
proved,  from  this  institution  alone,  that  infant  baptism  was  not 
from  the  beginning. 

From  all  the  premises  before  us,  may  we  not,  then,  safely 
afi&rm  that  there  is  no  divine  precept,  no  approved  example,  no 
authority  for  infant  baptism  in  the  Holy  Oracles  or  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  primitive  church  ?  On  the  contrary,  there  are — 1st. 
in  the  faith  and  repentance  often  required;  2d,  in  the  import  of 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  S69 

the  Institution  itself;  3d,  in  the  schools  and  discipline  established 
in  and  by  the  ancient  church  for  the  instruction  and  preparation 
of  children  for  the  proper  understanding  and  believing  reception 
of  the  ordinance — the  clearest  indications  that  there  is  no  more 
divine  authority  for  baptizing  an  infant  than  for  giving  it  the 
consecrated  vrafer,  the  holy  oil  of  Komanism,  or  the  sacred  me- 
morials of  a  Saviour's  dying  love  ? 

With  these  premises  before  the  candid  reader,  we  ask  him 
whether  he  can  repose  with  a  full  acquiescence  in  the  tenth  and 
last  argument  of  Dr.  Miller,  and  that  of  his  still  more  learned 
predecessor.  Dr.  Wall — viz.  that  'Hlie  histonj  of  the  Christian 
church  from  the  apostolic  age  furnishes  an  argument  of  irresistible 
force  in  favour  of  the  Divine  authority  of  infant  baptism !"  Great 
must  be  the  implicit  confidence  of  any  man,  we  think,  or  great 
must  be  his  ignorance  of  church  history,  who  can  lend  his  assent 
to  an  assumption  as  gratuitous  and  unwarrantable  as  the  plea 
for  auricular  confession,  transubstantiation,  or  extreme  unction. 

I  am  now,  and  have  been  long  of  the  opinion  that  these 
reverend  gentlemen  who  talk  so  easily  and  so  positively  of 
church  history  and  its  faithful  records,  are  much  better  read  in 
Roman  Catholic  church  history  than  in  Christian  antiquity  or 
the  true  history  of  the  hosts  of  remonstrants  that  never  gave 
their  assent  to  the  haughty,  imperious,  and  baseless  assump- 
tions of  "the  man  of  sin,''  whose  church  history  is  but  that  of 
his  own  lofty  pretensions  to  a  regular,  hereditary,  ecclesiastical 
descent  from  St.  Feter  and  that  church  in  the  imperial  city,  of 
which  they  say  he  was  the  first  prelate  as  well  as  the  chief 
founder ;  the  whole  of  which  story,  though  gravely  told  a  million 
of  times,  and  fully  believed  by  a  thousand  million  of  human 
kind,  during  twelve  successive  centuries,  is  as  grand  a  legend 
or  as  magniloquent  a  tale  as  that  of  the  Arabian  Nights,  or 
that  of  the  more  plausible  Robinson  Crusoe. 

But  that  my  readers  may  hear  Dr.  Miller  in  his  own  grave 
conclusions,  and  that  I  may  give  him  the  last  word,  and  lest 
any  one  should  think  that  I  have  done  him  any  injustice,  I 
shall  quote  directly  his  own  epitome  of  the  strength  of  his  own 
evidence.     It  is  in  the  words  following,  to  wit: — 

"  Such  is  an  epitome  of  the  direct  evidence  in  favour  of  infant 
baptism.  To  me,  I  acknowledge,  it  appears  nothing  short  of 
demonstration.  The  invariable  character  of  all  Jehovah's  deal- 
ings and  covenants  with  the  children  of  men ;  his  express  ap- 


870  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

pointment,  acted  upon  for  two  thousand  years  by  the  ancient 
church;  the  total  silence  of  the  New  Testament  as  to  any  re- 
tractation or  repeal  of  this  privilege ;  the  evident  and  repeated 
examples  of  family  baptism  in  the  apostolic  age ;  the  indubita- 
ble testimony  of  the  practice  of  the  whole  church  on  the  Pedo- 
baptist  plan,  from  the  time  of  the  Apostles  to  the  sixteenth 
century,  including  the  most  respectable  witnesses  for  the  truth 
in  the  dark  ages  ;  all  conspire  to  establish  on  the  firmest  foun- 
dation the  membership,  and  the  consequent  right  to  baptism, 
of  the  infant  seed  of  believers.  If  here  be  no  divine  warrant, 
we  may  despair  of  finding  it  for  any  institution  in  the  church 
ofGod."^'  ^ 

I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  proceed  to  an  examination  of  all 
the  alleged  authorities  for  infant  baptism  adduced  from  the  last 
half  of  the  third  century,  and  from  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries. 
These  are  all  too  far  off  from  the  apostolic  age.  Besides,  in  the 
same  period  I  find  almost  all  the  errors  of  the  ancient  church 
appearing  in  well  defined  outlines,  explicit  enough  for  the 
humblest  intellect. 

It  may,  however,  be  useful  to  some  minds,  easily  influenced 
by  even  a  spurious  antiquity,  to  state  a  few  undeniable  facts, 
and  to  make  a  few  observations  on  the  testimonies  pressed 
upon  our  attention  by  Dr.  Wall  and  his  too  credulous  and  san- 
guine admirers.  I  shall  begin  with  the  celebrated  Council  of 
Carthage,  a.  d.  253,  and  its  presiding  genius,  St.  Cyprian,  with 
his  sixty-six  bishops.  H.  Danverse,  in  his  book  on  Baptism, 
1674,  alleges,  that  he  "would  rather  believe  that  these  things" 
(touching  the  baptism  of  infants  eight  days  old)  "had  been 
foisted  into  his  writings  by  that  villanous,  cursed  generation, 
that  so  horribly  abused  the  writings  of  most  of  the  ancients, 
than  to  suppose  Cyprian  and  his  bishops  so  ignorant  as  to  de- 
cide in  favour  of  baptizing  on  the  eighth  day.'^  I  see  no  need 
for  such  a  solution  of  the  case:  for  other  sayings  and  decisions 
of  this  Council  of  Carthage  were  equally  childish.  For  example : 
"We  judge,"  says  he,  "that  no  person  is  to  be  hindered  from 
obtaining  the  grace  of  remission,  because  they  are  not  his  own, 
but  others'  sins,  that  are  forgiven  him" — that  is,  original  sin 
or  the  sins  of  his  parents  are  forgiven  him.  A  sage  argument, 
truly,  for  infant  baptism  ! 

But  the  learned  Grotius  takes  other  ground,  and  denies  that 
there  is  any  authority  from  any  council  for  infant  baptism  pre- 
vious to  the  Council  of  Carthage,  held  in  the  year  418.    He 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  871 

argues  against  the  universality  of  infant  baptism  even  in  the 
third  century.  Besides,  Dr.  Wall  himself  admits  that  some  of 
the  reasons  given  by  these  "  Fathers/'  in  support  of  the  alleged 
decrees  of  the  African  Council,  "are  weak  and  frivolous." 

Were  I  challenged  to  the  task,  as  a  matter  of  consequence,  to 
take  the  whole  collation  and  authors  of  the  third,  fourth,  and 
fifth  centuries,  adduced  by  Dr.  Wall,  and  to  argue  from  them 
against  the  assumption  that  infant  baptism  was  from  the  begin- 
ing,  I  would,  with  much  confidence  of  a  successful  issue,  very 
cheerfully  undertake  it.  Nothing  in  the  form  of  circumstantial 
reasoning  could,  to  my  mind,  be  more  conclusive  against  him 
than  his  own  authorities,  in  the  hand  of  a  skilful  and  competent 
reasoner.  I  will  give  only  a  sample  or  two  of  his  authorities, 
and  of  the  logical  application  of  them  to  this  effect.  He  quotes 
the  letter  of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  a.  d.  253,  addressed  to 
Fidus,  in  response  to  the  interrogatory,  "  Whether  an  infant, 
before  it  was  eight  days  old,  might  he  baptized,  if  need  required  V 
Fidus  was,  it  seems,  against  this  practice.  The  Council  are  in 
favour  of  it:  for  what  reasons?  1st.  "Because  the  Son  of  Man 
came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives,  but  to  save  them.''  2d.  "Be- 
cause, as  far  as  lies  in  us,  no  soul  is  to  be  lost."  "For  it  ia 
written.  To  the  clean  all  things  are  clean."  4th.  "  Because  the 
eighth  day,  that  is  next  to  the  Sabbath  day,  was  to  be  the  day 
on  which  the  Lord  was  to  rise  from  the  dead,  and  quicken  us 
and  give  us  the  spiritual  circumcision."  5th.  "Because  Peter 
said.  The  Lord  has  shown  me  that  no  person  is  to  bo  called 
common  or  unclean."  6th.  "  Because  they  are  not  his  own,  but 
others'  sins,  that  are  forgiven  him."  "  Therefore,  it  is  not  for 
us  to  hinder  any  person  from  baptism  and  the  grace  of  God, 
who  is  merciful  and  kind  and  affectionate  to  all."*  So  reason 
St.  Cyprian  and  his  sixty-six  bishops.  Not  one  scripture  is 
quoted  by  way  of  authority.  No  appeal  is  made  to  scripture 
precept,  precedent,  or  even  to  the  history  of  the  church.  Now, 
can  any  one,  free  from  prejudice,  imagine  that  if  infant  baptism 
had  been  from  the  beginning  a  primitive,  apostolic  usage,  such 
a  superannuated,  dotardly  affair  as  this  Carthage  decision  could 
possibly  have  occurred,  or  that  such  a  question  should  have 
been  debated  as  late  as  the  last  half  of  the  third  century  ?  I 
wonder  not  that  such  men  as  "the  great  Grotius"  should  have 

*  Wall's  History  of  Infant  Baptism,  vol.  i.,  pp.  129-132. 


372  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

argued  against  the  universal  prevalence  of  infant  baptism  even 
so  late  as  the  fourth  century,  from  the  very  authorities  which 
are  urged  in  proof  of  its  apostolic  origin  and  authority. 

Concerning  the  sixth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Neocesarea, 
passed  a.  d.  314,  which  saith,  "A  woman  with  child  may  be 
baptized  when  she  pleases.  For  the  mother  in  this  matter  com- 
municates nothing  to  the  child :  because,  in  the  profession,  every 
one's  own  [or  peculiar]  resolution  is  declared,  [or  because  every 
one's  resolution  is  declared  to  be  peculiar  to  himself.]"  I  am 
of  the  same  opinion  with  Grotius,  who  says  of  it,  "How  much 
soever  the  commentators  draw  it  to  another  sense,  it  is  plain 
that  the  doubt  concerning  the  baptizing  women  great  with  child, 
was  for  that  reason  because  the  child  might  seem  to  be  baptized 
together  with  the  mother,  and  a  child  was  not  wont  to  be  bap- 
tized but  upon  its  own  will  and  profession."  Grotius  quotes 
Balsamon  and  Zonaras,  of  the  twelfth  century,  as  interpreting 
this  canon  as  he  does,  for  which  he  has  good  authority.  But 
on  these  matters  I  lay  no  stress  whatever.  They  only  show  that 
learned  and  very  distinguished  men,  not  Baptists  either,  concur 
with  us  in  repudiating  the  decrees  of  councils  as  evidence  that 
infant  baptism  was  fully  established  in  their  days,  or  that  it  was 
from  the  beginning. 

After  describing  the  preparation  for  receiving  baptism,  as 
respects  the  state  of  mind  of  the  recipient  of  it,  St.  Gregory 
Nazianzen  says,  "Some  may  suppose  this  to  hold  in  the  case  of 
those  who  can  desire  baptism.  What  say  you  to  those  that  are 
as  yet  infants,  and  are  not  in  a  capacity  to  be  sensible  either  of 
the  grace  or  the  miss  of  it  ?  Shall  we  baptize  them  too  ?  Yes, 
by  all  means,  if  danger  make  it  requisite.  For  it  is  better  that 
they  be  sanctified  without  their  own  sense  of  it,  than  that  they 
should  die  unsealed  and  uninitiated.  And  a  ground  of  this  to  us 
is  circumcision,  given  on  the  eighth  day,  which  was  a  typical  seal, 
or  baptism,  and  was  practised  on  those  that  had  no  use  of  rea- 
son, as  also  the  anointing  of  the  door-posts,  which  preserved  the 
first-born  by  things  that  had  no  sense."  "As  for  us,"  (whom 
danger  of  death  docs  not  threaten,)  "I  give  my  opinion  that 
they  should  stay  three  years  or  thereabouts,  when  they  are 
capable  to  hear  and  answer  some  of  the  holy  words,  and 
though  .they  do  not  perfectly  understand  the  words,  yet  they 
form  them,  and  that  you  then  sanctify  them  in  soul  and  body 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  373 

with  the  great  sacrament  of  initiation.^'*  This  needs  no  com- 
ment. 

At  this  period,  a.  d.  360,  it  is  very  evident  that  infant  baptism 
was  still  in  debate ;  and  no  one  as  yet  presumes  to  appeal  to  the 
history  of  the  church  from  the  beginning.  This  may  be  made 
still  more  evident  from  the  words  of  the  great  Basil,  his  con- 
temporary. He  says,  "There  is  a  time  for  sleep,  a  time  for 
watching,  a  time  of  war,  a  time  of  peace  ;  but  any  time  of  one's 
life  is  proper  for  baptism ;  yet  the  most  proper  time  is  Easter." 
Again,  he  says,  "Do  you  demur,  and  put  it  off,  when  you  have 
been  from  a  child  catechised  in  the  word?  Are  you  not  got 
acquainted  with  the  truth  ?  Having  been  always  learning  it, 
are  you  not  come  to  the  knowledge  of  it?  A  seeker  all  your 
life  long;  a  considerer  till  you  are  old.  When  will  you  be 
made  a  Christian  ?  When  shall  we  see  you  become  one  of  us  ? 
You  do  not  know  what  change  to-morrow  may  bring."  This  is 
a  very  striking  passage ;  and,  notwithstanding  the  assertion  of 
Dr.  Wall,  that  these  were  the  children,  not  of  Christians,  but  of 
unbaptized  pagans,  I  must  think  that  amongst  these  were  the 
children  of  Christians ;  else,  I  ask,  how  could  he  say,  "You  have 
been  from  a  child  catechised  in  tlie  word  !"  Did  pagans  so  bring 
up  their  children  ?  Did  they  teach  them  that  the  Bible  was  the 
book  of  God  ?  Did  they  introduce  them  to  a  Saviour  in  whom 
they  did  not  believe  ?  This  passage  from  Basil  is  alone  suffi- 
cient to  show  that,  in  the  fourth  century,  infant  baptism  was  any 
thing  but  universal. 

To  Basil,  we  shall  add  a  quotation  from  St.  Chrysostom:  "The 
catechumens  being  of  this  mind,"  (having  an  aversion  to  a 
godly  life,)  "to  take  no  care  of  a  godly  life;  and  those  that  are 
baptized,  some  of  them,  forasmuch  as  they  were  children  when 
they  received  it,  and  some,  for  that  they  received  it  in  a  fit  of 
sickness,  having  put  it  off  to  that  time,  and  having  no  mind  to 
live  godly,  show  no  good  inclination.  And  they  that  received 
it  in  their  health  show  but  very  little  ;  having  been  for  the  pre- 
sent zealously  affected,  afterward,  even  they  let  their  fire  of  zeal 
go  out."     So  spoke  Chrysostom,  a.  d.  380. 

We  are  now  brought  down  to  the  era  of  the  Pelagian  contro- 


*  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Wall,  vol.  i.  p.  177.  The  Greek  for  the 
sacrament  of  initiation,  is,  rw  iieyaXo)  nvarripioi  Trjg  reAejcjffewf,  rather  the  great 
mystery  of  perfection  or  initiation. 

22 


374  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

versy,  to  the  commencement  of  the  fifth  century,  and  till  this 
time  we  have  no  decree  of  any  council,  nor  declaration  of  any 
distinguished  author  that,  fairly  construed,  could  induce  us  to 
think  that  infant  baptism  was  practised  from  the  beginning,  or 
that  it  had  become  universal.  No  one  appears  even  disposed  to 
trace  it  up  to  the  apostolic  age ;  but  to  assign  for  it  some  other 
reason  or  authority,  doctrinal  or  inferential.  It  seems,  indeed, 
all  the  while  struggling  against  objections,  and  finding  in  cir- 
cumcision, or  expediency,  or  in  the  opinion  of  some  distin- 
guished persons,  a  support  for  itself — evidently  wanting  the  seal 
and  the  authority  of  apostolic  sanction,  either  in  the  form  of 
precept  or  example. 

We  know  no  good  reason  for  either  listening  to,  or  examining, 
the  conflicts  of  St.  Austin  and  St.  Jerome  against  Pelagius  and 
Caelestius,  on  original  sin,  and  their  respective  allusions  to  bap- 
tism for  remission  of  sins  ;  or  the  reasons  urged  for  and  against 
its  application  to  infants  according  to  their  respective  theories 
and  hypotheses.  They  but  reiterate  the  dogmas  and  decrees  of 
their  own  times — the  decisions  of  fathers  and  councils,  with 
their  own  assertions  and  opinions. 

As  a  matter  of  curiosity,  however,  we  will  quote  a  passage  or 
two  from  Dr.  Wall's  History  of  Infant  Baptism,  setting  forth 
the  views  of  the  most  orthodox  of  all  the  great  fathers,  the  de- 
fenders of  the  faith  and  traditions  of  the  true  church,  as  opposed 
to  the  equally  distinguished  heterodox  and  heretical  Pelagius, 
who  is  quoted  as  aflirming  that  "men  slander  me,  as  if  I  denied 
the  sacrament  of  baptism  to  infants,  or  did  promise  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  to  some  persons  without  the  redemption  of 
Christ ;  which  is  a  thing  that  I  never  heard,  no,  not  even  any 
wicked  heretic  say."*  "  Who  is  there  so  ignorant — who  can  be 
so  impious  as  to  hinder  infants  from  being  baptized  and  born 
ao-ain  in  Christ,  and  to  make  them  miss  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  ;  since  our  Saviour  has  said  that  none  can  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  that  is  not  born  again  of  water  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  ?  Who  is  there  so  impious  as  to  refuse  to  an  infant, 
of  what  age  soever,  the  common  redemption  of  mankind,  and 
to  hinder  him  that  is  born  to  an  uncertain  life  from  being  born 
again  to  an  everlasting  and  certain  life  ?"t 

Pelagius,  in  all  this,  was  verbally  most  orthodox :  for  all  the 


*  Wall,  vol.  i.  p.  236.  t  Ibid.  p.  450. 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  375 

church,  with  the  great  St.  Austin,  believed  and  taught  infant 
baptism  for  the  remission  of  sin  original.  Austin  said  of  the 
Pelagians,  "Beset  both  with  the  authority  of  God's  word,  and 
with  the  usage  of  the  church  that  was  of  old  delivered  to  it, 
and  has  been  since  kept  by  it  in  the  baptizing  of  children,  that 
they  dare  not  deny  that  infants  are  baptized  for  forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  that  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  church  does 
this  in  any  trickish  or  deceitful  meaning ;  but  since  what  is 
acted  is  acted  seriously,  that  which  is  spoken  must  be  supposed 
to  be  really  done." 

But  adds  St.  Austin,  although  Pelagius  in  this  speaks  accord- 
ing to  the  true  church,  "  The  Pelagians  do  not  yield  that  infants 
are  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins  in  such  a  sense  as  that 
any  sins  are  forgiven  to  them  who,  they  say,  have  none," — 
namely,  infants;  "but  that  they,  though  they  be  without  sin,^' 
{i.  e.  original  sin,)  "yet  are  baptized  with  that  baptism  by 
which  is  granted  forgiveness  of  sins  to  all  that  have  any."* 
Concerning  this  concession  of  Pelagius  to  the  orthodox  St,  Aus- 
tin, Dr.  Wall  says,  "There  will  ever  be  this  difference  between 
a  man  of  sense  and  a  thick-skulled  man — that  the  former,  if  he 
find  himself  gravelled,  will,  at  least,  have  the  modesty  to  give 
over  talking.  Pelagius,  after  he  was  brought  to  this  contradic- 
tion, kept  silence,  and  we  hear  no  more  of  him."f 

So,  then,  it  appears  that  Pelagius,  St.  Austin,  and  Dr.  Wall 
agree,  first,  in  infant  baptism ;  and  secondly,  in  pretence  the  first, 
and  in  sincerity  the  last  two,  believed  in  the  baptism  of  in- 
fants for  the  remission  of  original  sin ;  and  that  vdthout  either 
faith  or  repentance  on  their  part.  This,  no  doubt,  was  the  mys- 
tic charm  of  infant  baptism,  and  its  passport  into  the  Catholic 
faith  of  all  that  taught  or  believed  infant  damnation  for  original 
sin,  or  because  of  simple  descent  from  a  fallen  and  condemned 
progenitor. 

Indeed,  Dr.  Wall  strongly  affirms  that  St.  Austin,  and  the 
orthodox  with  him,  "held  as  certain  that  children  which  are 
baptized,  dying  before  they  commit  actual  sin,  are  undoubtedly 
saved;"  "for,"  continues  Dr.  Wall,  "St.  Austin  says  in  these 
last  words  that  'he  that  does  not  believe  this' — that  baptized 
children  dying  in  infancy  are  undoubtedly  saved — 'is  an  inji- 
del.'"  "Austin  plainly  supposes,"  says  Dr.  Wall,  "that  without 

*  Wall,  vol.  i.  p.  454.  t  Ibid.  p.  464« 


876  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

"baptism  they  would  be  liable  to  eternal  damnation  because  of 
original  sin."* 

"Austin  did  not  think,"  says  Dr.  Wall,  "nor  pretend  that 
infants  that  are  baptized  have,  in  any  proper  sense,  faith  or  re- 
pentance, or  conversion  of  heart,  &c.  How  much  soever  he  is 
here  pressed  with  the  difficulty  of  explaining  the  reasons  why 
godfathers  answer  in  the  child's  name — *  He  does  believe' — he 
does  not,  for  all  that,  fly  to  the  justifying  of  so  great  a  paradox 
as  to  say  that  the  child  does  indeed,  in  a  proper  sense,  under- 
stand, believe,  or  disbelieve  any  thing.  He  shows  the  words 
are  true  in  a  sacramental  sense,  but  does  not  maintain  that  they 
are  so  in  a  proper  one.  Nay,  he  plainly  yields  that  they  are 
not:  he  grants  that  infants  cannot  as  yet  either  believe  with  the 
heart  or  confess  with  the  mouth.  And  when,  at  other  times,  he 
argues  that  infants,  after  they  are  baptized,  are  no  longer  to  be 
counted  either  among  the  injidels  or  catechumens,  but  the  fideles 
or  credentes,  (believers;)  yet  still  he  means  and  explains  himself 
as  he  does  here — *  that  they  are  constituted  Jideles,  not  by  that 
faith  which  consists  in  the  will  of  believers,  but  by  the  sacra- 
ment of  faith.'  He  holds,  indeed,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  does 
do  offices  for  the  infant  and  is  in  the  infant.  You  see  here  his 
words :  the  regenerating  spirit  is  one  in  these  that  bring  the 
child,  and  in  the  child  that  is  brought:  and  in  that  part  of  the 
epistle  which  I  left  out  because  of  the  length,  he  says,  *  The 
water  affording  outwardly  the  sacrament  of  the  grace,  and  the 
Spirit  operating  inwardly  the  benefit  of  the  grace,  loosing  the 
bond  of  guilt,  &c.,  do  regenerate.'  But  he  supposes  the  infants 
to  be  merely  passive,  and  not  to  know,  understand,  or  co-operate 
any  thing  themselves."  "We  affirm,  therefore,  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  dwells  in  baptized  inftmts,  though  they  know  it  not:  for 
after  the  same  manner  they  know  him  not,  though  he  be  in  them, 
as  they  know  not  their  own  soul :  the  reason  whereof,  which 
they  cannot  yet  make  use  of,  is  in  them,  as  a  spark  raked 
up,  which  will  kindle  as  they  grow  in  years."  Dr.  Wall,  pp. 
276,  277,  278. 

Thus  believed,  wrote,  and  taught  the  revered  and  admired 
Saint  Austin,  the  heau  ideal  and  prototype  of  the  justly  cele- 
brated John  Calvin.  I  have  given  Dr.  Wall's  translation  of  the 
original  Latin,  lying  before  me,  that  I  might  not  be  supposed  to 

*  WaU,  vol.  i.  p.  274. 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  377 

have  given  a  single  tint  or  shade  to  the  views  of  the  great  patron 
of  infant  baptism.  With  such  views  of  baptism  as  those  here 
delineated,  professed  by  orthodox  and  heterodox,  by  catholics 
and  heretics,  no  one  need  wonder  at  the  popularity  of  the  rite, 
its  wide  diffusion,  or  the  tenacity  of  its  hold  on  the  minds  and 
affections  of  a  too  credulous  and  servile  people. 

We  have  considered  every  thing  extant,  appealed  to  by  its 
advocates,  in  Old  Testament  and  New — every  thing  alleged 
from  church  history,  in  the  form  of  "Apostolic  Fathers,'' 
Greek  Fathers,  distinguished  writers,  "decrees  of  Synods  and 
Councils,''  &c.  &c.,  down  to  the  period  when  "the  man  of  sin" 
arrives  at  full  maturity,  and,  with  his  crown  and  mitre,  his 
shepherd's  crook,  his  crosier  and  sword  spiritual,  proclaims 
himself  Pontifex  Maximus,  "the  Prince  of  the  Apostles," 
"the  Vicar  of  Christ,"  and  "the  Head  of  the  Church." 

From  this  period  down,  we  can  find,  as  we  have  already 
shown,  a  host  of  distinguished  men  in  every  age,  with  their 
scattered  communities — Mountaineers  or  Piedmontese — bearing 
witness  for  the  Apostolic  Institutions,  and  against  the  haughty 
and  insolent  assumptions  of  the  Koman  Pontiff,  exalting  him- 
self above  all  the  gods  of  earth  and  objects  of  human  fear,  sitting 
in  the  temple  of  God,  assuming  to  be  his  Vicegerent,  claiming 
for  himself  a  reverence  and  an  adoration  due  to  God  alone. 
He,  indeed,  has  even  aimed,  and  successfully,  "  to  change  times 
and  laws"  and  usages  inimical  to  his  own  claims  and  pre- 
tensions. Leaving  the  youth  of  the  Christian  profession  to  the 
necessity  of  making  a  personal  application  and  a  personal  pro- 
fession of  the  faith  before  initiation  by  baptism,  was  by  no 
means  so  favourable  to  the  rapid  growth  and  worldly  aggrand- 
izement of  his  church,  as  the  universal  baptism  of  infants  as 
soon  as  born.  The  Roman  hierarchy  never  was  in  favour  of 
much  thinking  or  examination  on  the  part  of  its  population. 
The  clergy  will  think  for  them,  if  the  people  will  only  faithfully 
believe  and  serve  them.  I  need  not,  then,  trace  through  the 
sixth  century  the  still  more  rapid  progress  of  this  rite.  It  never 
was,  however,  catholic — ^that  is,  universal.  To  pursue  it  farther 
in  this  direction  would  be  but  waste  of  time  and  prodigality 
of  life. 


878  REVIEWS  OF  THE 


CHAPTER  VI. 

REVIEW   OF  DR.  KURTZ   AND   REV.  MR.  HALL. 

In  our  preceding  reviews,  we  have  already  attended  to  a 
portion  of  their  plea  drawn  from  the  Jewish  institution,  or 
from  the  supposed  identity  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  institu- 
tions. But  what  remain  are  a  few  passages  selected  from  the 
apostolic  writings,  almost  universally  alleged  by  Pedobaptist 
writers  in  favour  of  infants,  and  which  have  had  more  influence 
on  the  imperfectly  instructed  readers  of  the  New  Testament 
than  any  other  arguments  urged  by  the  advocates  of  this 
ancient  rite. 

The  first  of  these  is  found  in  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  as 
reported  by  some  of  the  Evangelists.  It  is  in  the  following 
words: — "Then  were  there  brought  unto  him  little  children,  that 
he  should  put  his  hands  on  them,  and  pray:  and  the  disciples 
rebuked  them.  But  Jesus  said,  Suffer  little  children,  and  forbid 
them  not,  to  come  unto  me,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
Matt.  xix.  13,  14.  This  important  incident  is  also  reported  by 
Mark,  and  in  the  words  following,  to  wit: — "And  they  brought 
young  children  to  him,  that  he  should  touch  them ;  and  his  dis- 
ciples rebuked  those  that  brought  them.  But  when  Jesus  saw  it, 
he  was  much  displeased,  and  said  unto  them.  Suffer  the  little 
children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not:  for  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  God.  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Whosoever  shall  not 
receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child,  he  shall  not  enter 
therein.  And  he  took  them  up  in  his  arms,  put  his  hands  upon 
them,  and  blessed  them."  Mark  x.  13-lG.  So  important  is 
this  incident,  that  it  is  also  noticed  by  Luke  in  the  words  follow- 
ing, viz.  "And  they  brought  unto  him  also  infants,  that  he 
would  touch  them:  but  when  his  disciples  saw  it,  they  rebuked 
them.  But  Jesus  called  them  unto  him,  and  said.  Suffer  little 
children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not:  for  of  such  is 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Verily,  I  say  unto  you.  Whosoever  shall 
not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child,  shall  in  no  wise 
enter  therein."     Luke  xviii.  15-17. 

We  have  given  the  common  version  of  this  important  incident, 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  379 

Ibecause  this  is  due  to  those  who  argue  from  it,  and  because  it 
gives  to  them  all  the  advantages  they  can  claim. 

The  first  point  made  on  this  passage  is,  that  it  is  thrice  re- 
peated in  the  New  Testament. 

The  second  is,  that  the  inspired  writers  did  not  use  the  word 
pais,  but  paidion;  because,  as  they  allege,  the  former  word 
{pais)  indicates  a  young  man  and  a  servant  of  mature  age  and 
reason ;  whereas  the  latter  {paidion)  denotes  an  infant,  a  very 
young  child,  a  speechless  babe.  So  also  the  word  hreplios  is 
used  once  in  Luke. 

The  third  point  is,  that  the  Lord  declared  the  kingdom  of  God  to 
be  composed  of  such.  Therefore,  infants  have  a  right  to  baptism 
and  to  consequent  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  or  the  New 
Testament  church.  That  I  have  done  justice  to  the  Pedobaptists, 
I  will  quote  Rev.  Edwin  Hall,  A.  M.,  of  Connecticut — 1810 — 
one  of  the  most  recent  and  learned  writers  on  the  subject: — 

"Some  parents  once  brought  little  children  (infants,  says 
Luke,  xviii.  15)  to  Christ,  that  he  should  lay  his  hands  on  them 
and  bless  them.  His  disciples  forbade  them.  They  understood 
that  Christ's  kingdom  was  to  rest  upon  faith  in  the  soul,  and 
upon  the  intelligent  obedience  of  men  to  his  precepts ;  but  how 
could  children  have  this  faith  or  this  knowledge  ?  They  appear 
to  have  come  to  the  same  conclusion  concerning  bringing  little 
children  to  Christ  that  he  might  touch  them,  that  many  in  these 
days  arrive  at  concerning  the  baptism  of  little  children: — 'What 
good  can  it  do  to  an  unconscious  babe?^  At  all  events,  they 
forbade  these  parents  to  bring  their  infants  to  Christ  for  this 
purpose.  But  Christ  rebuked  them ;  he  called  the  little  children 
to  him;  he  took  them  in  his  arms;  he  blessed  them;  he  said, 
*  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not ; 
for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  He  meant,  by  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  either  his  earthly  church  or  his  heavenly ;  it 
matters  not  which,  for  the  argument.  If  the  heavenly  church 
is,  in  part,  made  up  of  such,  then  this  was  a  sufficient  reason 
for  Christ  why  he  should  take  them  in  his  arms  and  bless  them, 
and  rebuke  those  who  would  forbid  them  to  be  brought  to  him. 
It  is  the  very  reason  that  he  alleged :  and  he  himself  drew  these 
conclusions  from  the  reason.  What  an  argument  for  bringing 
little  children  to  Christ  now — that  he  may  seal  them  as  his 
own;  and  that  visibly,  as  he  did  when  he  took  them  in  his 
arms !  But  if  by  '  kingdom  of  heaven^  he  meant  his  earthly 
church,  then  the  argument  is  at  an  end :  they  are  to  be  baptized 
on  this  express  warrant. 

"Those  who  wish  to  prevent  this  passage  from  bearing  on 
the  question  at  issue,  say,  that  by  the  words  '  of  such'  our  Lord 


880  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

meant — not  of  such  infants,  but  of  such  '  simple-hearted  and 
humble  persons'  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  This  would  be  a 
good  reason  why  '  simple-hearted  and  humble  persons'  should 
not  be  forbidden  to  come  to  Christ ; — but  the  fact  that  '  simple- 
hearted  and  humble'  adults  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  is 
no  reason  why  Christ  should  take  infants  in  his  arms  and 
bless  them. 

"  It  is  said,  we  forget  that  Jesus  did  not  haptize  them.  No,  we 
do  not  forget  that '  Jesus  himself  baptized  not,  but  his  disciples.' 
It  is  not  necessary  for  us  to  assert  or  to  suppose  that  these  in- 
fants were  baptized  at  all.  Christ's  disciples  were  sent  at  first 
to  preach,  not  a  redemption  completed,  but  to  preach,  saying, 
*The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hatid.'  Their  final  commission 
was  after  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord ;  and  at  that  time  he  in- 
stituted his  baptism  ;  which  appears  to  be  essentially  different 
from  the  baptism  practised  before.  The  disciples  of  Christ  bajy- 
tized  newly  made  disciples  before  this,  but  it  seems  to  have 
been  John's  '  baptism  of  repentance,'  Acts  xix.  4,  and  not  the 
baptism  instituted  by  Christ  as  the  new  seal  of  his  covenant. 
Grant  it,  if  our  brethren  please,  that  these  infants  were  not  bap- 
tized. This  conduct  of  Christ,  and  this  rebuke  which  he  admi- 
nistered to  those  who  would  forbid  infants,  would  at  least  teach 
his  disciples  no  more  to  reject  infants  from  the  blessings  of  the 
Christian  religion,  under  the  notion  that  infants  cannot  believe. 
It  would  teach  them  no  more  to  forbid  parents  to  bring  them  to 
Christ  for  his  blessing.  It  would  teach  them  to  be  cautious  how 
they  forbade  infants  from  the  privileges  which  God  had  char- 
tered to  them  in  his  covenant.  It  was  designed  to  teach  how 
Christ  regarded  infants  ;  and  the  remembrance  of  this  would 
necessarily  bear  upon  the  interpretation  which  they  would  give 
with  regard  to  the  application  of  the  new  seal,  whether  to  apply 
it  to  infants  or  not." 

This  is  justly  regarded  an  important  incident  reported  by 
three  of  the  four  Evangelists.  But  as  it  was  spoken  before 
Christian  baptism  was  instituted,  it  can  have  no  logical  nor 
rational  bearing  on  that  subject.  1st.  And,  indeed,  the  avowed 
object  of  those  who  brought  these  children  to  the  Saviour  is  de- 
clared to  be  not  to  receive  an  ordinance,  but  to  obtain  a  Ijlessing. 
Jesus  did  lay  his  hands  upon  them  and  bless  them,  or  pray  for 
them  ;  and,  therefore,  the  intention  of  those  who  brought  them 
was  gained ;  which  was  not  baptism,  but  a  blessing. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  as  to  the  words  used  to  indicate  the 
age  of  those  children,  they  are  alleged  to  be  terms  indicative  of 
perfect  infancy,  such  as  hrephos  and  j^ci'dion.  But  while  these 
terms  do  sometimes  indicate  very  young  children,  they  arc  also 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  381 

used  to  represent  those  of  some  years — indeed,  of  years  capable 
of  learning  the  Scriptures.  Timothy,  while  a  brephos,  or  child, 
says  Paul,  knew  the  holy  Scriptures.  For  this  is  the  word  se- 
lected by  him  when  speaking  of  the  early  attainments  of  Timo- 
thy, 2d  Epis.  Tim.  iii.  15  : — "  From  a  hrepTios,  a  child,  thou  hast 
known  the  holy  Scriptures."  Such  a  brephos  is,  with  us,  a  proper 
subject  of  baptism.  The  same  is  true  of  paidion,  often  trans- 
lated a  "little  child;"  but  John  and  the  other  Apostles  call  adult 
persons,  as  well  as  striplings  and  damsels,  paidia.  Jesus  says, 
*'  Behold  I  and  the  children,  paidia,  whom  God  has  given  me." 
This  term,  with  him,  indicates  all  the  family  of  God.  Indeed, 
a  girl,  said  by  Mark  to  be  twelve  years  old,  is  called  a  paidion. 
See  chapter  v.  39,  43.  Many  such  instances  could  be  given,  but 
surely  these  will  suffice  to  show  what  fallacious  guides  these  are 
who  would  lead  the  people  to  imagine  that  these  were  speechless 
babes  and  senseless  infants  brought  to  Jesus  to  be  blessed — 
when  children  from  one  to  twelve  years  and  more  are  so  denomi- 
nated !  ! 

But  there  are  in  these  passages  themselves  evident  indications 
that  they  were  not  babes — perfect  infants.  "  Suffer  little  chil- 
dren to  come  to  me."  He  does  not  say  carry  them  to  me,  but 
let  them  come.  Again,  in  Mark  and  Luke,  he  says,  "  Suffer  the 
little  children  to  come  to  me."  They  were,  then,  capable  of  hear- 
ing, learning,  and  coming  to  him. 

Yet  he  does  not  say  that  "  of  them  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven;" 
but  "  of  such .'" — of  those  as  humble,  docile,  and  ingenuous  as 
they — of  sucJi  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  Abraham,  and  Moses, 
and  David,  the  Prophets  and  Apostles,  are  in  character  and 
spirit  as  teachable  and  subordinate  as  babes — and  so  are  all  the 
children  of  God. 

But  more  than  enough  has  been  said  to  show  how  entirely  in- 
apposite to  the  case  before  us  are  these  quotations  from  the 
Evangelists,  which  have  respect  to  the  imposition  of  the  Saviour's 
hands  and  his  benedictions  on  children,  before  Christian  bap- 
tism was  at  all  instituted,  as  all  agree  that  Christian  baptism 
was  instituted  after  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  "We,  therefore, 
proceed  to  another,  yet  a  somewhat  similar  argument,  deduced 
from  a  passage  in  Acts  of  Apostles,  chap.  ii.  ver.  38,  39.  "  Re- 
pent and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you" — "  for  the  promise  is  to 
you  and  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off,  even  as  many 
as  the  Lord  your  God  shall  call." 


S82  REVIEWS  OP   THE 

On  this,  Rev.  Benjamin  Kurtz,  of  Baltimore,  says — 

"  Observe  here,  that  the  children  spoken  of  were  *  little 
children ;'  according  to  Mark  x.  16,  they  were  so  young  that 
our  Saviour  '  took  them  up  in  his  arms ;'  and  in  Luke  xviii.  15, 
they  are  expressly  called  '  infants.'  They  must  accordingly 
have  been  children,  not  only  in  temper,  docility,  &c.,  but  also  and 
emphatically  in  age  and  stature.  Notice  next,  that  our  Lord 
positively  affirms  respecting  them,  that,  '  of  such  is  the  kingdom 
of  heaven ;'  that  is,  of  such  little  children  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven, — to  them  it  belongs,  or  theirs  this  kingdom  is.  *  It  is 
well  known,'  says  Professor  Smucker,  '  to  those  acquainted  with 
the  phraseology  of  the  New  Testament,  that  the  expressions 
*'  kingdom  of  God"  and  "  kingdom  of  heaven"  are  familiarly  used 
to  designate  the  churchof  God  under  the  New  Testament  econo- 
my. Thus,  John  the  Baptist  preached,  saying,  Hepent  ye,  for 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand.  It  will  not  ])e  supposed  that 
heaven  was  literally  descending  to  the  earth  and  had  almost 
arrived  among  us ;  but  the  Saviour  evidently  meant,  that  the 
time  for  remodelling  his  church  into  its  New  Testament  form 
was  at  hand.'  Robert  Hall,  a  distinguished  and  learned  Baptist 
minister,  explains  this  phrase  in  the  same  manner.  His  words 
are,  *  The  kingdom  of  God,  a  phrase  which  is  constantly  employed 
in  Scripture  to  denote  that  state  of  things  which  is  placed  under 
the  avoived  administration  of  the  Messiah,'  If,  then,  the  ex- 
pression, '  kingdom  of  heaven,'  signifies  the  visible  church  of 
God,  as  distinguished  both  from  the  heathen  world  and  the  old 
economy,  and  the  church,  as  Christ  declares,  is  composed  in  part 
of  *  little  children,'  or  embraces  them  as  members,  then,  of 
course,  they  are  entitled  to  baptism  as  the  sign  of  their  member- 
ship. 

"  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  Apostle  here  uses  the  definite 
article  the, — not  a,  but  '  the  promise,'  that  is,  the  promise  of 
God  to  Aljraham,  *  to  be  a  God  unto  thee  and  unto  thy  seed  after 
thee,'  is  equally  *  unto  you  and  to  your  children.'  Now,  in  order 
to  decide  what  Peter  meant  by  the  expression,  *  your  children,' 
it  is  only  necessary  to  ascertain  the  import  of  the  words  '  thy 
seed'  in  the  promise  referred  to.  It  is  universally  admitted,  and 
has  never  been  denied,  that  the  latter  comprises  small  children, 
*  eight  days  old,'  and  hence  it  follows,  with  all  the  clearness  and 
certainty  of  a  mathematical  demonstration,  that  the  former  em- 
braces the  same  description  of  individuals.  Every  one  knows 
that  the  word  seed  means  children ;  and  that  children  moans 
seed  ;  and  that  they  are  precisely  the  same.  The  promise,  then, 
in  which  God  engages  to  be  our  God  and  to  constitute  us  his 
people,  extends  equally  to  our  children  ;  and,  of  course,  gives 
them,  as  well  as  us,  a  right  to  the  privileges  of  his  people.  And 
if  they  have  a  riglit  to  those  privileges,  what  further  argument 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT   BAPTISM.  383 

need  we  to  show  that  they  are  entitled  to  the  outward  token  and 
seal  of  those  privileges  ? 

"  It  will  avail  nothing  here  to  inform  us,  that  tehna,  children, 
means  posterity ; — suppose  it  does, — sperma,  seed,  also  means 
postei^ity  ;  but  both  include  our  earliest  as  well  as  our  latest  pos- 
terity, our  youngest  children  as  well  as  our  most  distant  suc- 
cessors. Admitting  that  the  word  children  does  not  always  sig- 
nify infants,  the  question  is,  whether  it  can  mean  any  thing  else 
but  infants  in  this  passage  ?  Peter  speaks  to  all  who  are  capa- 
ble of  understanding  him.  These  he  calls  you.  Now,  whom 
can  he  possibly  mean  by  the  children  of  these  hearers  but  the 
infant  offspring  which  they  either  had  or  might  have  ?  And  if 
the  promise  to  the  adults  be  a  reason  for  submitting  to  be  bap- 
tized, it  must  also  be  a  reason  for  baptizing  the  children  ;  since 
the  promise  is  said  to  be  equally  to  both;  and  this  is  made  the 
foundation  of  their  baptism." 

By  what  law  or  laws  of  interpretation  Dr.  Kurtz  could  make 
*'  the  j^romise"  here  named  "  the  covenant  of  circumcision,"  or 
the  promise  to  be  a  God  to  Abraham  and  his  seed  after  him,  and 
to  make  it  to  children  of  eight  days,  I  confess  my  entire  ina- 
bility to  perceive.  To  my  mind,  no  assumption  in  any  system, 
Papal  or  Protestant,  is  more  destitute  of  any  form  of  even  spe- 
cious proof. 

This  is  the  more  arbitrary  and  illogical,  inasmuch  as  *'the 
promise"  is  expressly  said  by  Peter  to  be  **  the  promise  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,"  which  is  extended  to  all  that  are  near  and  "  afar 
off,  even  to  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call."  It  is  Joel 
that  Peter  quotes,  and  not  Moses,  as  Dr.  Kurtz  imagines.  The 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  immediate  antecedent  to  "  the  pro- 
mise"— as  any  one  may  see  from  the  slightest  attention  to  the 
passage.  Again,  both  the  children  named  in  the  text  and  those 
afar  off  are  restricted  by  Joel  to  "as  many  of  both  as  the  Lord 
our  God  shall  call.'' 

It  appears  unnecessary  to  show  how  perfectly  imaginative 
these  expositors  are  in  their  comments.  The  term  "  children'^ 
here  used  applies  no  more  to  infants  than  to  the  present  genera- 
tion of  the  Jews  ;  for  these  are  all  the  children  of  Abraham, 
though  from  eight  days  to  eighty  years  old ! 

I  need  scarcely  again,  except  for  formality,  allude  to  the  house- 
hold or  family  baptisms  reported  in  Acts  of  Apostles.  These 
have  already  been,  we  think,  fully  disposed  of.  We  name  them 
here  in  making  a  full  exhibit  of  all  that  is  alleged  from  the  New 
Testament  on  this  subject.    Much  reliance  has  been  placed  upon 


384  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

them  by  the  defenders  of  infant  church  membership,  although 
the  circumstances  and  details  of  their  families  forbid  the  pre- 
sumption that  there  was  an  infant  in  one  of  them ;  and  if  there 
were  even  a  plausible  presumption,  we  have  shown  that  to  found 
a  positive  institution  upon  such  a  presumption  would  be  alike 
without  reason  and  authority  from  God's  own  Book. 

I  have  sometimes  alluded  to  the  fact  that,  were  half  the  fami- 
lies in  a  given  district  baptized,  there  would  not  be  an  infant  in 
one  of  them.  This  would  have  always  been  the  case  around  my 
residence  and  in  most  of  the  neighborhoods  of  my  acquaintance. 
It  is,  therefore,  the  most  precarious  basis  on  which  any  one 
could  found  an  argument  for  infant  baptism. 

The  only  remaining  passage  in  the  New  Testament  on  which 
the  advocates  of  this  rite  rely,  is  1st  Corinthians  vii.  14 :  "Else 
were  your  children  unclean,  but  now  they  are  holy  ;"  a  passage 
which,  in  oiir  review  of  Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton,  we  have  shown 
to  be  against,  rather  than  in  favour  of  infant  baptism.  The 
sophism,  we  have  unanswerably  shown,  in  that  case,  is  the  Pe- 
dobaptist  assumption  that  the  children  here  named  were  the 
children  of  those  married  to  an  unbelieving  party  ;  whereas  the 
letter  of  the  passage  is  not  tJieir  children,  but  "  else  were  your 
children  unclean,"  Corinthians,  "but  now  they  are  holy!'* 
Consequently  they  were  unbaptized,  else  the  Apostle's  argu- 
ment is  a  palpable  sophism :  for  to  prove  that  an  unbelieving 
and  unbaptized  wife  was  sanctified  to  the  other  party  by  the  fact 
that  a  hapiized  child  was  holy  or  sanctified,  would  be  as  glaring 
a  sophism  as  the  annals  of  criticism  record.  There  is  not,  then, 
in  all  the  passages  adduced  from  the  New  Testament,  the  shadow 
of  a  reason  or  argument  for  infant  baptism. 

But,  before  dismissing  this  subject  from  our  pages  for  the 
present,  there  are  two  arguments  against  the  position  of  our 
Pedoliaptist  friends,  to  which  I  specially  invite  their  attention. 
The  first  of  these  respects  their  method  of  constructing  an  ar- 
gument for  a  positive  institution ;  and  the  other  is  an  apostolic 
inhibition  of  their  whole  system  of  reasoning  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament or  Covenant  in  favour  of  infant  church  membership.  A 
word  or  two  on  these  may  yet  be  apposite  on  the  present  occa- 
sion. 

First,  then,  as  to  the  method  of  constructing  an  argument  for 
a  positive  rite.  Bo  it,  then,  emphatically  stated,  that  their  me- 
thod is  not  to  produce  either  a  precept  or  a  precedcut  for  infant 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  385 

baptism ;  but  to  infer  it  from  sundry  passages  of  Scripture ; 
never  presuming  to  find,  in  any  one  passage,  premises  for  the 
whole  rite,  but  for  a  part  of  it.  Then,  by  putting  these  parts 
together,  supposed  to  be  logically  inferred  from  sundry  sayings, 
they  construct  positive  authority  for  a  positive  right.  This  is, 
most  certainly,  as  unprecedented  among  men  as  it  is  inconclu- 
sive in  point  of  logical  propriety.  Who  evqr  heard,  in  any 
other  case,  of  inferring  a  part  of  an  ordinance  from  one  sen- 
tence in  one  passage,  and  from  another  sentence  in  another  pas- 
sage, referring  to  something  else ;  and  then,  by  converting  these 
two  inferences  into  one,  make  it  a  positive  and  explicit  autho- 
rity for  a  Christian  institution  ?  Were  lawyers  and  public  de- 
baters to  act  in  this  way,  they  would  expose  themselves  to  the 
derision  rather  than  to  the  admiration  of  their  opponents.  One 
scripture  saith,  "Judas  went  and  hanged  himself;"  another 
saith,  *'Go  and  do  likewise."  Put  these  together,  and  what  an 
inference ! 

These  special  pleaders  for  infant  baptism,  in  one  passage,  find 
the  Messiah  "blessing  little  children ;"  in  another,  they  find  him 
commanding  his  Apostles  to  "convert  the  nations,"  and  observ- 
ing little  children  in  nations,  and  the  Saviour  blessing  them, 
they  found  an  ordinance  called  infant  baptism  !  They  even  go 
beyond  one  testament :  for,  finding  Abraham  circumcising  his 
boys  in  one  dispensation,  and  Peter,  in  Jerusalem,  commanding 
thousands  of  men  and  women  to  be  baptized,  they  infer  that 
Christ  intended  infant  baptism.  The  law  of  circumcision  they 
find  in  one  testament,  and  the  law  of  baptism  in  another ;  and, 
because  the  cutting  off  of  flesh  is  somewhat  adumbrative  of 
separation,  and  because  water  in  baptism  takes  away  the  filth 
of  the  flesh,  putting  these  together,  they  infer  the  latter  came 
in  room  of  the  former,  and  immediately  set  about  instituting  a 
new  divine  ordinance  for  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh  ! 

Can  any  one  name  a  passage  that  either  commands  infant 
baptism  or  gives  a  precedent  for  it  ?  Can  any  one  give  an  in- 
stance of  a  divine  ordinance  founded  on  two  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  resting  upon  the  relevancy  of  two  inferences  ?  Can 
any  one  adduce  two  passages,  spoken  or  written  a  thousand 
years  apart,  as  being  on  any  occasion  made  the  foundation  of  a 
divine  institution?  We  fearlessly  challenge  Christendom  for 
such  a  case.  Until  that  is  produced,  we  must  regard  infant 
baptism  as  we  do   "extreme    unction,"    "clerical  celibacy," 


386  REVIEWS   OP   THE 

"prayers"  for  the  dead/'  or  any  other  papal  fancy  sustained  by 
cardinals,  popes,  and  oecumenical  councils. 

When  I  see  learned  bishops  and  hoary  doctors  carrying  one 
limb  of  an  institution  from  Ur  of  Chaldea;  another,  from  a 
mountain  in  Galilee ;  and  a  third,  from  a  Philippian  jailer  ;  and 
hear  them,  with  a  Westminster  Assembly,  call  it  "a  ISfeio  Testa- 
ment ordinance,  ordained  by  Jesus  Christ,'^  I  am  led  to  pray  for 
another  Luther  to  take  the  veil  off  the  face  of  such  blear-eyed 
Rabbles — to  make  a  new  scourge  of  very  small  cords,  and  drive 
them  out  of  the  temple  !  For  it  has  never  happened,  from  the 
days  of  Adam  till  now,  that  God  gave  a  positive  institution  to 
man,  whose  scattered  members  were  spread  over  a  field  of  reve- 
lation fifteen  hundred  years  from  end  to  end,  and  then  to  be 
gathered,  ploughed,  and  grooved  by  modern  theologians,  who 
never  had  the  use  of  tools,  or  were  taught  by  God  on  Sinai's 
summit,  to  rear  a  new  tabernacle  for  pilgrims  to  worship  at.  I 
have  neither  time  nor  space  to  push  this  matter  farther.  Since 
it  has  occurred  to  me,  I  only  wonder  why  it  is  that  these  new 
authors  of  divine  institutions  were  not  long  since  called  to  give 
some  authority  for  this  their  new  art  and  mystery  of  manufac- 
turing them. 

But,  when  all  argument  fails,  it  is  gravely  said,  "Infants  were 
once  members  of  the  Jewish  church,  which  was  a  church  of 
God,  and  that  by  virtue  of  a  Divine  covenant.  Now  the  ques- 
tion is.  When  ivere  they  cast  out.'' 

Infants  were  never  cast  out  of  the  Jewish  church,  as  some 
call  it ;  because  it  was  a  commonwealth,  and  the  only  excom- 
munication from  it  was  death.  It  was  a  church  of  this  world, 
a  great  community,  called  out  of  Egypt ;  and,  under  Moses  in 
the  wilderness,  God  made  a  covenant  with  them,  after  they  had 
all — men,  women,  and  children — been  "baptized  into  Moses  in 
the  cloud  and  in  the  sea ;"  yet  with  many  of  them  God  was  not 
well  pleased,  for  "there  fell  in  one  day  three  thousand  souls." 
There  was  no  regeneration  preached  by  Moses  in  order  to  an 
adoption  which  was  national  and  political  as  well  as  religious. 
They  were  all,  in  virtue  of  natural  birth,  without  regeneration 
or  a  second  birth,  entitled  to  the  rank  and  relation  of  members 
of  the  Jewish  national  church.  Flesh,  and  not  faith,  was  the 
only  prerequisite.  It  was,  therefore,  a  "worldly  sanctuary," — 
a  kingdom  of  this  world — a  holy  nation,  or  a  people  outwardly 
sanctified  or  set  apart  for  a  special  purpose.     They  were  as  po- 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  887 

litical  as  the  English  nation.  Their  saints  were  kings,  gene- 
rals, and  military  captains.  Their  ministers,  priests,  and  high- 
priest  were  men  in  the  flesh,  and  they  served  in  the  "oldness  of 
the  letter,"  and  not  in  newness  of  spirit.  They  were,  however, 
a  typical  people,  and  their  institutions,  national  existence,  pri- 
vileges, and  honours  were  all  shadows  of  good  things  to  come. 
God  has,  however,  provided  some  better  things  for  us,  that  they, 
without  us,  Christians,  "should  not  be  perfect.''  He  promised 
that  he  would  one  day,  "make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house 
of  Israel  and  the  house  of  Judah,  not  like  that  at  Sinai,  made 
with  their  fathers,"  It  is,  then,  very  easy  for  us  to  answer  the 
question,  "If  infants  were  once  members  of  the  Jewish  church, 
when  were  they  cast  out?"  First,  then,  they  were  cast  out 
when  the  whole  nation  were  divorced  or  separated  from  their 
covenant  relation  to  God.  When  the  nation  ceased  to  be  God's 
only  nation  and  people ;  then  were  parents  and  children  cast 
off  or  cast  out.  "We  shall,  then,  hear  Paul  discuss  the  question, 
in  his  masterly  and  divinely  authorized  way: — "Tell  me,  ye 
that  desire  to  be  under  the  law,  do  ye  not  hear  the  law  ?  Fop 
it  is  written,  that  Abraham  had  two  sons ;  the  one  by  a  bond- 
maid, the  other  by  a  free-woman.  But  he  who  was  of  the  bond- 
woman was  born  after  the  flesh  ;  but  he  of  the  free-woman  was 
by  promise.  Which  things  are  an  allegory :  for  these  are  the 
two  covenants ;  the  one  from  the  mount  Sinai,  which  gendereth 
to  bondage,  which  is  Agar.  For  this  Agar  is  mount  Sinai,  in 
Arabia,  and  answereth  to  Jerusalem  which  now  is,  and  is  in 
bondage  with  her  children.  But  Jerusalem  which  is  above  is 
free,  which  is  the  mother  of  us  all.  For  it  is  written.  Rejoice, 
thou  barren  that  bearest  not ;  break  forth  and  cry,  thou  that 
travailest  not :  for  the  desolate  hath  many  more  children  than 
she  which  hath  an  husband.  Now  we,  brethren,  as  Isaac  was, 
are  the  children  of  promise.  But,  as  then,  he  that  was  born 
after  the  flesh  persecuted  him  that  was  born  after  the  Spirit, 
even  so  it  is  now.  Nevertheless,  what  saith  the  Scripture  ? 
Cast  out  the  bond-woman  and  her  son :  for  the  son  of  the  bond- 
woman shall  not  be  heir  with  the  son  of  the  free-woman.  So 
then,  brethren,  we  are  not  children  of  the  bond-woman,  but  of 
the  free."  Here,  in  the  person,  relations,  and  history  of  Sarah, 
Hagar,  Isaac,  and  Israel,  are  described  with  peculiar,  circum- 
stantial exactness  the  two  covenants,  the  two  churches,  the  pri- 


388  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

vileges,  honours,  and  immunities  of  the  subjects  of  these  two 
divine  institutions. 

Abraham,  as  a  son  of  God  and  the  father  of  all  believers,  is 
introduced  as  the  founder  of  both  churches.  He  had  two  wives — 
one  free,  and  one  a  hond-woman.  These  two  women,  Paul  says, 
represent  two  institutions  or  two  covenants — constitutions  of 
society — and  are  by  him  converted  into  an  allegory.  They  are 
allegorized  in  the  following  manner: — The  two  women,  both 
wives,  one  free,  the  other  bond,  have  each  a  son  to  Abraham. 
One  is  siipernaturalhj,  the  other  naturally  born.  Sarah  never 
would  have  been,  by  tlie  course  of  nature,  a  mother.  By  grace, 
through  faith,  and  not  by  nature,  she  brought  forth  Isaac,  the 
son  of  promise.  Hagar's  son  was  born,  like  the  Jews,  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh.  He  was,  by  simple  nature,  without  grace,  a 
son  of  Abraham.  But,  according  to  immemorial  usage,  the  son 
follows  the  mother,  as  respects  freedom  or  bondage  ;  therefore, 
Isaac  was  free-born — Ishmael  a  bond  servant. 

Next  were  introduced  two  Jerusalems — one  resembling  Sarah 
and  her  son ;  the  other,  Hagar  and  her  son :  the  latter,  earthly ; 
the  former,  heavenly.  Like  Hagar  and  her  son,  the  Jerusalem 
on  earth  was  in  bondage  when  Paul  wrote  to  the  Galatians. 
Like  Sarah  and  her  son,  the  Jerusalem  above  was  then  free. 
She,  the  Lord  be  praised,  is  the  mother  of  all  Christians,  as  the 
former  was  the  mother  of  all  Jews. 

Isaiah  lends  his  aid  to  Paul,  just  at  this  point,  when  portray- 
ing in  heavenly  strains  the  great  increase,  the  superior  progeny 
of  the  barren  Sarah,  in  contrast  with  that  of  the  youthful 
fleshly  Hagar:  "  Kejoice,  thou  barren  woman,  that  bearest  not; , 
break  forth  and  shout,  thou  that  travailest  not''  in  birth ;  for 
thou,  the  deserted  woman,  forsaken  for  a  time  by  Abraham  for 
the  sake  of  Hagar,  now  "hast  many  more  children  than  she 
who  had  (your)  husband."  **  AVe  then,  brethren,"  says  Paul, 
"  as  Isaac  was,  are  the  children  of  promise."  AVe  are  children  by 
believing  the  promise — they  were  children  without  faith— chil- 
dren of  the  flesh.  Such  was  the  Jewish  church  by  virtue  of  the 
old  Sinai  church  covenant,  Paul  being  judge  and  expositor. 

It  deserves  to  be  emphatically  noted  here,  as  both  illustrative 
and  corroborative  of  one  of  the  characteristics  already  noted, 
of  a  community  that  embraces,  as  members  of  the  church,  all 
born  of  woman.  I  allude  to  its  persecuting  character.  We 
have  Paul  witli  us  here;  "for,"  says  he,  "as  then,"  in  the  case 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  389 

of  Ishmaers  insults  to  Isaac  and  Sarah,  "he  that  was  born  after 
the  flesh  persecuted  him  that  was  born  after  the  Spirit,  even  so 
it  is  now,''  The  Jewish  church,  as  such,  with  her  elders,  scribes, 
and  priests,  persecuted  even  to  death  the  Lord  of  glory,  some 
of  his  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  and  ultimately  drove  the  whole 
church  out  of  the  Jerusalem  that  then  was,  scattering  its  mem- 
bers throughout  Judea  and  Samaria,  even  to  foreign  cities. 

"What  a  correspondence  and  in  how  many  points  I  But,  adds 
Paul,  "What  saith  the  Scripture?''— the  old  Scripture,  coeval 
with  Moses,  and  detailing  the  affairs  of  the  Abrahamic  family — 
"  What  saith  the  Scripture  ?  Cast  out  the  hond-woman  and  her 
son,  for  the  son  of  the  bond-woman  shall  not  be  heir  with  the  son 
of  the  free-iDoman.''  Where  now  is  the  Jewish  covenant,  church 
and  people  !  Is  the  Christian  church  but  the  Jewish  church  en- 
larged and  improved?  !  "What  saith  the  Scripture  ?  Cast  out 
the  bond-woman" — one  of  the  covenants — "  and  her  son" — the 
people  under  it — from  being,  as  such,  the  Christian  church  ;  "  for 
the  sons  of  the  bond-woman" — the  offspring  of  the  old  Jewish 
covenant,  the  fleshly  seed — "  shall  not  inherit"  or  be  heir  with 
the  children  of  the  new  institution,  or  the  "free-woman" — who 
is  the  mother  of  us  all — Jews  and  Gentiles,  iio^  as  such,  but  as 
born  of  the  Spirit. 

What  could  be  more  conclusive?  Abraham  the  root  of  the 
Jewish  nation,  was  great  in  faith  and  great  in  flesh.  He  was 
the  fleshly  father  of  many  nations,  and  of  one  nation  great,  and 
mighty,  and  prolific.  But  he  is  also  the  father  of  all  that  be- 
lieve, circumcised  or  uncircumcised,  because  of  his  mighty  faith. 
He  was  the  root  of  the  Jewish  church  by  flesh.  He  is  the  root 
of  the  Christian  church  by  faith.  Jesus,  the  Messiah,  both  in 
flesh  and  spirit,  was  his  son,  and  was  the  author  and  founder  of 
a  new  church,  whose  members  are  not  born  after  the  flesh,  but 
after  the  Spirit — not  of  blood,  nor  of  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of 
man,  but  of  the  power  or  will  of  God. 

The  same  Apostle  to  the  Romans,  11th  chapter,  reasons  on 
this  matter  farther,  and,  in  some  points,  more  fully  and  satisfac- 
torily. The  nucleus  or  germ  of  the  Christian  church  were  Jews 
as  respects  flesh,  but  not  as  such,  but,  by  faith  in  Jesus  as  the 
Christ,  they  became  the  germ  of  the  Christian  church.  "  Thoti 
standest  by  faith."  The  other  branches  of  the  Abrahamic  stock 
were  broken  off  from  any  special  relations  to  God.  The  nation, 
as  such,  was  rejected.    The  believing  members  of  it  only  were 

S3* 


390  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

made  participants  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  God's  spiritual 
olive-tree.  Gentiles,  not  as  such,  but  such  of  them  as  "had  ob- 
tained like  precious  faith,"  were  grafted  in  among  the  believing 
Jews,  and  made  participants  with  them  of  all  spiritual  privi- 
leges— of  "the  root  and  fatness,"  the  benefits  and  blessings 
spiritual  of  "  the  good  olive-tree."  The  Jews,  then,  not  as  such, 
were  broken  off,  but  because  of  unhelief, — and  the  Gentiles,  not 
because  of  flesh,  but  of  faith,  were  grafted  in  among  them.  So 
Paul  reasons  with  the  Romans,  and,  in  another  figure  and  with 
other  illustrations  than  those  presented  to  the  Galatians,  esta- 
blishes the  same  great  fact — that  the  Jewish  church  is  not  the 
Christian  church,  either  in  covenant  or  citizenship,  either  in  im- 
munities or  honours.  The  members  of  the  former  were  born  of 
the  flesh — the  members  of  the  latter,  by  faith.  The  privileges 
and  honours  of  the  one  were  worldly  and  temporal — of  the  other, 
spiritual  and  eternal.  Let  no  one,  then,  count  on  parentage, 
natural  birth,  or  worldly  covenants  guarantying  lands  and  tene- 
ments, worldly  riches,  and  honours,  for  introduction  to  the 
church  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  and  the  son  of  Abraham ; 
for  "without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God,"  and  "unless 
a  man  be  born  of  the  Spirit  and  of  water,  he  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God,"  now  established  and  administered  by 
Jesus  Christ.  Let  all  Pedobaptists  remember  "  what  saith  the 
Scripture" — "not  the  children  of  the  flesh,  but  of  the  Spirit,  are 
now  counted  for  the  seed.''  "  Cast  out,"  then,  "  the  bond- wo- 
man and  her  son ;  for  the  son  of  the  bond-woman  shall  not  be 
heir  with  the  son  of  the  free-woman.  So  then,  brethren,  we 
(Christians)  are  not  sons  of  the  bond-woman,  but  of  the  free.'' 
We  are  not  baptized  because  of  our  fleshly  descent  from  mem- 
bers of  any  church,  but  because  "  born  from  above — bojm  of  the 
Spirit."  "Stand  fast,  then,  in  the  liberty  wherewith  the  Mes- 
siah has  made  us  free,  and  be  not  again  entangled  with  the 
bondage  and  tyranny  of  a  law  of  outward  rites  and  ceremonies. 
For  we  are  the  true  circumcision,  which  worship  God  in  spirit, 
rejoice  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  have  no  confidence  in  the  flesh." 

We  have,  then,  not  only  attempted  to  show  that  infant  bap- 
tism has  no  authority  in  the  New  Testament,  direct  or  indirect, 
in  the  form  of  precept  or  of  precedent — in  the  form  of  allusion 
or  reference,  expressed  or  implied  ;  but  we  have  gone  farther — 
we  have  attempted  to  show  that  it  is  impliedly  contrary  to  some 
of  the  clearest  developments,  statements,  and  reasonings  of 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  891 

Apostles,  Evangelists,  and  Prophets ;  and,  still  farther,  we  pre- 
sume to  say,  that  it  is,  in  all  its  assumptions  and  pretences,  not 
only  void  of  authority,  but  expressly  in  conflict  with  many  tes- 
timonies of  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  with  the  whole  genius, 
spirit,  and  letter  of  Christianity,  as  revealed  to  us  in  that  Holy 
Book  by  which  we  are  all  to  be  judged  in  the  great  and  glorious 
day  of  the  Lord.  Of  course  it  remains ;  then  let  it  remain  with 
every  reader  to  say  whether,  on  a  careful  and  impartial  exami- 
nation of  the  whole  premises  before  him,  we  have  succeeded  in 
all  that  we  have  attempted,  and  scripturally  and  logically  formed 
our  judgment,  and  expressed  in  justifiable  terms  our  convictions, 
sustained  by  reasons  and  authorities  on  which  we  can  safely 
rely.  If  so,  then  let  him  see  to  it  that  he  consistently  acts  in 
conformity  to  his  own  convictions,  and  as  he  would  wish  to 
have  done  when  he  appears  before  the  Searcher  of  all  hearts,  who 
will  render  to  him  according  to  his  opportunity  and  his  works. 

There  yet  remains  another  argument,  with  which  we  shall 
close  this  branch  of  the  subject.  It  springs  from  the  remarks 
just  now  made.  It  is  founded  on  our  personal  responsibility. 
Every  man  must  answer  for  himself;  and,  in  doing  this,  his 
talents,  opportunities,  and  dispositions  will  be  taken  into  the  ac- 
count. If,  then,  the  future  and  final  judgment  is  to  be  accord- 
ing to  every  man's  work,  personal  liberty  and  personal  respon- 
sibility are  established  on  such  premises  as  make  it  absolutely 
indispensable  that  every  one  think  and  examine  for  himself,  and 
act  from  his  own  convictions.  Need  I  ask,  how,  then,  can  any 
one  act  by  proxy  in  the  things  of  salvation  ?  or  how  can  any 
one  be  finally  justified  or  condemned  for  that  which  is  not  his 
own  act  ? 

A  grave  question  then  must  be,  Are  parents  or  their  cJiildren  to 
answer  for  neglect  in  the  case  of  haptism  ?  It  must  be  the  duty 
of  parents  to  have  their  children  baptized ;  or  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  children  to  be  baptized  on  their  own  responsibility.  It  can- 
not be  the  duty  of  both.  Pedobaptists  contend  it  is  the  duty  of 
parents,  and  not  of  their  ofispring.  But  where  is  the  precept  or 
the  example  so  obliging  parents  ?  No  one  can  show  a  word  in 
the  New  Testament  on  the  subject.  It  is,  indeed,  the  duty  of 
the  subject  of  baptism  himself  to  be  baptized.  If  so,  then  he 
must  be  an  intelligent,  voluntary,  or  moral  agent ;  and  such  an 
infant  is  not :  therefore,  he  cannot  be  a  subject  of  baptism  in 
his  own  right. 


392  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

But  the  doctrine  of  Christ  constitutes  the  subject  of  baptism 
an  intelligent,  voluntary,  and  accountable  agent,  and,  therefore, 
commands  him  to  believe,  repent,  and  be  baptized  on  his  own 
conviction  of  duty  and  interest.  Personal  liberty  of  choice  is, 
on  all  hands,  admitted  to  be  essential  to  personal  responsibility. 
Christ's  people  are  all  free  men ;  therefore,  no  one,  by  parent, 
by  sponsor,  or  by  priest,  can  be  carried  or  compelled  into  the 
kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ.  If  so,  they  may  be  physically  carried 
to  the  Lord's  table  and  to  heaven,  and  neither  illumination  nor 
volition,  neither  the  conscience  nor  the  heart,  have  any  thing  to 
do  with  our  entrance  into  the  church  or  our  participations  of  its 
spiritual  blessings.  He  that  assumes  this  ground  is  not  to  be 
reasoned  with  by  any  one  that  "  trembles  at  the  word  of  God." 


CHAPTER  VII. 

REVIEW    OF    PROFESSOR    STUART    OF    ANDOVER. 

We  do  not  think  that  we  would  presume  too  much  upon  the 
candour  and  good  sense  of  all  impartial  inquirers  after  the  pro- 
per action  and  subject  of  Christian  baptism,  who  may  have  read 
with  impartial  consideration  our  previous  essays  on  these  highly 
interesting  topics,  if  we  should  say,  that,  in  their  judgment, 
these  two  important  items  of  the  Divine  will  have  been  amply 
and  satisfactorily  developed  by  an  appeal  to  the  proper  sources 
of  evidence  and  authority,  on  such  questions.  Still,  as  the  minda 
of  very  many  well-disposed  persons  have  been  greatly  sophis- 
ticated by  a  show  of  authority  and  certain  special  pleadings, 
based  on  some  comparatively  obscure  passages  of  Scripture,  or 
allusions  to  ancient  customs,  not  well  understood,  I  judge  it  ex- 
pedient to  select  a  few  specimens  of  these,  by  way  of  appendix 
to  the  direct  evidence  already  furnished  on  those  topics. 

And,  first,  on  the  action  of  baptism,  much  has  been  inferred 
from  one  occurrence  of  the  word  haptizo,  rendered  by  the  word 
V}ash,  Mark  vii.  3,  4. 

Professor  Stuart,  of  Andover,  writes  a  very  elaborate  essay  to 
sustain  the  opinion  of  Calvin — viz.  "  It  is  of  no  consequence  at 
all  whether  the  person  baptized  is  totally  immersed,  or  whether 
he  is  merely  sprinkled  by  an  aifusion  of  water.  This  should  be 
a  matter  of  choice  to  the  churches  in  different  regions,  although 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  393 

the  word  baptize  signifies  to  immerse,  and  the  rite  of  immersion 
was  practised  by  the  ancient  church."  P.  364.  "To  this  opi- 
nion," says  he,  "  I  do  most  heartily  subscribe."  Of  course,  then, 
the  strict  and  proper  meaning  of  the  word  baptize  is  of  no  conse- 
quence whatever,  as  every  one's  choice  is  all-sufficient  to  please 
God !  The  Lawgiver  of  the  universe  enacts  a  positive  law,  and 
gives  to  every  man  his  choice  of  three  modes  of  observing  it. 
Whichever  of  the  three  best  pleases  A,  B,  or  C,  will  perfectly 
please  God ! !  This  is  certainly  a  very  complaisant  and  gene- 
rous condescension  to  human  predilections  and  caprices.  But 
with  him  the  word  toasJi  justifies  this :  for,  as  we  may  wash  by 
spriiikling,  pouring,  dipping,  it  is  wholly  indifferent  which  of  the 
three  we  use.     "Whichever  pleases  us,  pleases  God  ! ! 

In  looking  over  the  use  of  baptizo  in  the  New  Testament,  find- 
ing that  in  eiglity  times  occurring,  it  is  twice  translated  wasli ; 
and  baptismos,  occurring  four  times,  though  never  applied  to 
the  ordinance,  is  three  times  translated  washing,  he  assumes  that 
this  rendering,  because  of  its  permitting  tliree  ways  of  using  water ^ 
is  the  very  meaning  which  we  should  always  affix  to  the  word 
when  indicating  the  institution  of  Christ ! !  Yet,  strange  to  tell, 
"by  only  looking  at  a  good  concordance,  he  might  see  that  the 
word  baptisma,  appropriated  to  the  ordinance  by  the  Messiah 
and  his  Apostles,  though  occurring  twenty-two  times,  is  never 
translated  by  the  term  wash  or  washing.  What  a  glorious  ambi- 
guity is  here  created !  .  Out  of  the  whole  family  of  baptizo, 
though  occurring  one  hundred  and  twenty  times  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, he  finds  once  wash  and  washed,  and  thrice  washing. 

Now,  then,  the  only  ground  of  debate  at  present  is.  Does  the 
term  wash,  in  these  passages,  or  rather  the  verb  wash,  as  found 
in  the  English  Testament,  Mark  vii.  3,  4,  indicate  any  thing 
short  of  immersion  in  that  particular  case?  And  that  I  may 
save  the  labour  of  much  writing,  I  will  freely  quote  from  Pro- 
fessor Ripley's  Examination  of  Professor  Stuart's  Essay.  On 
pages  39-47,  the  professor  says : — 

"  The  whole  passage,  as  expressed  in  the  common  version,  is 
the  following  : — '  For  the  Pharisees  and  all  the  Jews,  except  they 
wash  their  hands  oft,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  elders : 
and  when  they  come  from  the  market,  except  they  wash,  they 
eat  not.'  Here  are  mentioned  two  instances  of  washing,  (so 
called ;)  the  first,  a  matter  of  constant  occurrence ;  the  second, 
an  observance  performed  after  returning  from  the  market.  The 
inquiry  is  a  very  natural  one,  Did  these  washings  difi'er  from  one 


894  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

another  in  any  respect  ?  To  this  inquiry,  an  affirmative  answer 
can  scarcely  be  avoided.  For,  in  the  first  place,  one  was  a 
washing  which  commonly  occurred  before  a  meal,  without  re- 
gard to  the  employment  that  had  preceded  it ;  so  that  even  if  a 
person  had  remained  at  home,  still,  before  taking  his  meal,  he 
would  wash  his  hands.  The  other  was  a  ceremony,  performed 
after  having  been  exposed  to  the  various  occasions  of  defilement 
which  would  be  connected  with  his  attendance  at  market.  Such 
was  the  variety  of  persons  and  things  with  which  he  might  have 
contact,  that  a  more  formal  and  thorough  ablution  would  na- 
turally be  performed. 

"  In  examining  the  whole  passage,  especially  in  the  original, 
an  attentive  reader  will  perceive  an  advance  in  the  thought. 
There  is  presented,  at  first,  the  general  custom,  and  then  a  spe- 
cific case,  namely,  after  returning  from  the  market.  If,  in  com- 
mon, the  hands  were  washed  before  eating,  the  reader  is  pre- 
pared to  hear  that,  after  returning  from  a  mixed  crowd  of  people, 
something  difierent  from,  or  additional  to,  this  washing  was 
performed.  The  English  reader  might  overlook  this,  on  account 
of  the  repetition  of  the  word  ivasli  in  the  fourth  verse  ;  although 
I  cannot  but  think  he  would,  if  attentive,  be  sensible  of  some 
deficiency  in  the  representation,  unless  he  should  conclude,  from 
the  repeated  use  of  the  same  word,  ivash,  that  his  expectation  of 
a  more  formal  and  thorough  ceremony  after  returning  from 
market,  was  an  incorrect  one.  But,  to  a  careful  reader  of  the 
Greek,  no  such  sense  of  deficiency  arises,  and  no  such  disap- 
pointment occurs.  For,  as  further  showing  that  there  was  a 
difference  between  the  two  instances  of  washing,  I  observe : — 

"In  the  second  place,  two  different  Greek  words  are  era- 
ployed  to  express  the  washing  in  the  two  different  cases.  In 
the  third  verse,  we  read  ean  me  nipsoontai ;  while,  in  the  fourth, 
we  read  ean  me  haptisoontai.  These  two  words  well  correspond 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  two  cases ;  and,  rendered  according 
to  the  proper  meaning,  clearly  exhibit  the  advance  in  the 
thought.  To  make  this  matter  plain  to  a  mere  English  reader, 
I  observe,  there  is  a  difference  between  these  two  verses  in  the 
original,  like  what  would  be  felt  if  they  were  thus  translated : 
'For  the  Pharisees,  and  all  the  Jews,  except  they  icash  their 
hands  oft,  eat  not ;  and  when  they  come  from  the  market,  except 
they  hatlie,  they  eat  not.' 

"To  proceed.  Since,  now,  there  is  a  plain  difference  between 
these  two  cases  of  washing,  as  suggested  both  by  the  occasions 
and  by  the  different  verbs  employed  in  the  original,  what  was 
the  precise  difference  between  them  ?  Was  it  that,  on  common 
occasions,  they  washed  their  hands  only ;  while,  on  the  occa- 
sion of  returning  from  market,  they  immersed,  or  bathed,  their 
whole  persons  ?  So  thought  Vatablus,  a  distinguished  professor 
of  Hebrew  at  Paris,  for  whom  the  Jews  of  his  acquaintance 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  395 

entertained  a  very  high  regard.  *They  bathed/  says  he,  on 
Mark  vii.  4,  '  their  whole  persons.'  So  thought  Grotius,  who 
says,  on  Mark  vii.  4,  *  They  cleansed  themselves  more  carefully 
from  defilement  contracted  at  the  market,  to  wit,  by  not  only 
washing  their  hands,  but  even  by  immersing  their  body.  In 
conformity  to  this,  may  the  passage  in  Mark  be  rendered,  with- 
out the  least  violence  to  its  language.  In  conformity  with  this, 
too,  were  the  conveniences  among  the  Jews :  accommodations 
for  frequent  ablutions  were  everywhere  ready.  Nor,  with  their 
mode  of  dress,  would  the  practice  be  so  cumbersome  as  it  would 
be  among  us.' 

"  That  some  of  the  stricter  sort,  that  many,  enough  to  justify 
the  Evangelist's  general  expression,  did  practise  total  ablution 
on  the  occasion  mentioned,  is  altogether  credible.  Kuinoel, 
however,  in  his  commentary,  asserts  that  the  existence  of  such 
a  custom  among  the  Pharisees  is  not  sustained  by  sufficient  ar- 
guments. In  the  absence  of  clear,  satisfying  proof,  it  is  not  be- 
coming to  make  any  positive  assertions.  However  striking  the 
language  of  Mark  may,  by  some,  be  considered,  as  recognising 
such  a  practice,  (and  the  language  is  certainly  coincident  with 
such  a  practice,  especially  when  we  look  at  it  by  the  investiga- 
tions respecting  haptizo  on  the  preceding  pages,)  yet  I  am  not 
disposed  to  urge  it.  But,  assuming  the  ground  that  the  Evan- 
gelist did  not  intend  to  distinguish  a  total  bathing  from  a  par- 
tial washing,  I  again  inquire,  did  he  distinguish  one  soi'i  of 
partial  washing  from  another  soi^t  of  partial  washing,  one  of 
which  sorts  was  performed  by  the  dipping  of  the  hands  into 
water,  and  thus  was  properly  expressed  by  the  peculiar  term 
{haptizo)  which  he  has  employed  ?  If  so,  this  word  is  here  used 
in  its  radical,  proper  meaning ;  and,  consequently,  examined  in 
its  connection,  is  so  far  from  requiring  or  justifying  Professor 
Stuart's  view  of  its  meaning,  that  it  is  a  decisive  instance 
against  his  view. 

"I  have  already  said  that  the  word  [haptisoontai]  in  this  pas- 
sage may,  without  any  violence,  be  considered  as  distinguishing 
a  total  immersion  from  a  washing  of  the  hands.  I  am  by  no 
means  satisfied,  however,  that  this  is  a  necessary  view  of  the 
passage.  The  verb  is  in  the  middle  voice ;  and,  as  there  is 
no  object  expressed  after  it,  it  would  be  lawful,  in  order  to  ex- 
press the  Greek,  to  employ,  as  Professor  Stuart  has,  the  word 
themselves,  as  being  contained  in  the  verb  itself;  so  that  the  trans- 
lation would  be,  '  except  they  immerse  or  bathe  themselves.'  Still, 
as  the  verb  [nipsoontai)  in  the  former  part  of  the  passage  has, 
in  the  middle  voice,  an  object  [cheiras,  hands)  after  it,  it  is  cer- 
tainly justifiable,  though  not  necessary,  to  maintain  that  the 
verb  in  the  latter  part  of  the  passage  [haptisoontai)  has  the  same 
word  understood  after  it  for  its  object.  The  passage  would  then 
read,  *The  Pharisees  ....  except  they  wash  their  hands  oft,  eat 


396  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

not,  ....  and  when  they  come  from  the  market,  except  they  im- 
merse  or  bathe  their  hands,  they  eat  not.'  The  ambiguity  in  the 
Greek  is  much  the  same  as  there  is  in  the  following  English 

sentence :  *  The  Pharisees except  they  wash  their  hands  oft, 

eat  not ....  and  when  they  come  from  the  market,  except  they 
bathe,  they  eat  not.'  The  word  hands  may  be  considered  as 
understood  after  the  word  bathe,  or  the  word  themselves  may  be 
understood.  The  illustration  is  a  complete  one,  because  we  are 
not  in  the  habit  of  distinguishing  between  different  modes  of 
washing  the  hands. 

"I  proceed  now  to  the  inquiry,  whether  there  were  two  sorts 
of  washing  of  the  hands,  and  what  the  distinction  between 
them?  The  following  quotations  exhibit  all  that  I  have  to  offer; 
and  I  present  them  the  more  readily,  as  they  are  selected  from 
Pedobaptist  writers : — 

*'Jahn,  in  his  Biblical  Archaeology,  section  320,  makes  the 
following  statement :  *  The  washing  of  hands  before  the  meals 
(a  custom  which  originated  from  the  practice  of  conveying  food 
to  the  mouth  in  the  fingers)  was  eventually  made  a  religious 
duty ;  on  the  ground  that,  if  any  one,  though  unconscious  of 
the  circumstance  at  the  time,  had  touched  any  thing,  whatever 
it  might  be,  which  was  unclean,  and  remained  unwashed,  when 
he  ate,  he  thereby  communicated  the  contamination  to  the  food 
also.'  The  Pharisees  judged  the  omission  of  this  ablution  to  be 
a  crime  of  equal  magnitude  with  fornication,  and  worthy  of 
death. 

"They  taught  that,  if  a  person  had  not  departed  from  the 
house,  the  hands,  without  the  fingers  being  distended,  should  be 
wet  with  water  poured  over  them,  and  then  elevated  so  that  the 
water  might  flow  down  to  the  elbows  ;  furthermore,  the  water 
was  to  be  poured  a  second  time  over  the  arms,  in  order  that  (the 
hands  being  held  down)  it  might  flow  over  the  fingers.  This 
practice  is  alluded  to  in  Mark  vii.  3.  On  the  contrary,  those 
who  had  departed  from  the  house,  washed  in  a  bath,  or,  at  least, 
immersed  their  hands  in  water  with  the  fingers  distended.  The 
ceremony  in  this  case  (Mark  vii.  4)  is  denominated  can  me  bapti- 
soontai,  (except  they  immerse,  or  bathe.) 

"Dr.  George  Campbell,  on  Mark  vii.  3,  4,  says,  'For  illustrat- 
ing this  passage,  let  it  be  observed,  first,  that  the  two  verbs, 
rendered  wash  in  the  English  translation,  are  different  in  the 
original.  The  first  is  nipsoontai,  properly  translated  loash ;  the 
second  is  baplisoontai,  which  limits  us  to  a  particular  mode  of 
washing ;  for  baptizo  denotes  to  2)hinge,  to  dip.  This  is  more 
especially  the  import  when  the  words  are,  as  here,  opposed  to 
each  other.  Otherwise,  niptein,  like  the  general  word  to  wash  in 
English,  may  l)e  used  for  baptizein,  to  dip,  because  the  genus 
comprehends  the  species ;  but  not  conversely,  baptizein  for  baj)- 
iein,  the  species  for    the  genus.     By  this   interpretation,  the 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  397 

words  which,  as  rendered  in  the  common  version,  are  unmean- 
ing, appear  both  significant  and  emphatical ;  and  the  contrast 
in  the  Greek  is  preserved  in  the  translation/     Accordingly,  Dr. 

Campbell  translates  the  passage  thus :  'For  the  Pharisees eat 

not  until  they  have  washed  their  hands,  by  pouring  a  little 
water  upon  them ;  and  if  they  be  come  from  the  market,  by  dip- 
ping them.' 

"  Rosenmuller,  in  his  notes  on  this  passage,  speaks  of  two 
modes  of  washing  the  hands  ;  namely,  '  immersion  of  the  hands 
in  water,  and  when  one  hand  is  washed  by  the  other.' 

"Kuinoel,  also,  speaking  of  the  opinion  entertained  by  some, 
that  a  total  ablution  was  performed  in  case  of  returning  from 
the  market,  says,  'But  an  immersion  of  the  hands,  duly  per- 
formed, would  have  abundantly  sufficed  for  this  end ;'  that  is, 
for  purification  from  contact  with  the  multitude. 

"  Spencer,  on  the  Ritual  Laws  of  the  Hebrews,  speaks  thus : 
'  Some  of  the  Jews,  ambitious  for  the  credit  of  superior  purity, 
frequently  immersed  their  whole  persons  in  water ;  the  greater 
part,  however,  following  a  milder  discipline,  frequently  washed 
only  their  hands,  when  they  were  about  to  take  food.  That  the 
greater  part,  and  especially  the  Pharisees,  attended  to  this  rite 
privately,  at  home,  and  considered  it  a  very  important  part  of 
religion,  is  sufficiently  evident  from  Mark  vii.  3,  4.  Hence  it 
was  that  stone  vessels  for  water  [water-pots,  John  ii.  6]  were 
provided  for  every  house  of  the  Hebrews ;  so  that  all,  when 
about  to  take  food,  might  perform  the  frequent  washings,  accord- 
ing to  the  discipline  of  the  Pharisees.  These  vessels  were  very 
suitable  for  performing  these  daily  purifications  of  the  Jews ; 
for  it  was  customary  among  the  Jews,  sometimes  to  wash  the 
hands  by  water  poured  upon  them  ;  at  other  times,  to  immerse 
the  hands  in  water  up  to  the  wrist.' 

"From  Lightfoot,  I  gather  the  following:  On  Mark  vii.  4,  he 
says,  'The  Jews  used  "the  washing  of  hands,"  and  "the  plung- 
ing of  the  hands."  And  the  word  nipsooniai,  "wash,"  in  our 
Evangelist  seems  to  answer  to  the  former, — and  hapiisoontai, 

"  baptize,"  to  the  latter.' '  Those  that  remain  at  home,  eat  not 

....  "unless  they  wash  the  fist."     But  those  that  come  from  the 

market  eat  not, "unless  they  plunge  their  fist  into  the  water," 

being  ignorant  and  uncertain  what  uncleanness  they  came  near 
unto  in  the  market.'  '  The  phrase,  therefore,'  Lightfoot  adds 
'  seems  to  be  meant  of  the  immersion  or  plunging  of  the  hands 
only.'  But  I  remark,  though  it  were  only  the  hands  that  were 
plunged,  yet  the  meaning  of  haptizo  is  sufficiently  obvious." 

"The  preceding  copious  examination  helps  us,  of  course, 
rightly  to  understand  the  quotation  from  Luke  xi.  48,  which  is 
next  brought  forward  to  sustain  the  meaning  to  ivash,  ascribed 
to  haptizo:  'But  the  Pharisee,  seeing  him,  wondered  that  he 
had  not  first  ivashed  himself  {bapiisthe)  before  dinner.'     Com- 

3i 


398  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

mon  version,  *  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he  marvelled  that 
he  had  not  first  washed  before  dinner  -^  that  he  had  not  first 
immersed,  that  is,  himself,  or  his  hands.  By  the  preceding  part 
of  the  chapter,  it  appears  that  our  Lord  and  his  host  had  been 
exposed  to  a  great  mixture  of  company;  and,  therefore,  needed, 
in  the  judgment  of  the  Pharisee,  the  more  formal  and  thorough 
sort  of  washing.  On  this  passage,  too,  Lightfoot  observes, 
'  There  is  a  washing  of  the  hands,  and  there  is  a  dipping  of 
the  hands.'  This  clause  we  are  upon,  refers  to  this  latter. 
The  Pharisee  wonders  that  Christ  had  not  washed  his  hands  ; 
nay,  that  he  had  not  dipped  them  all  over  in  the  water,  when 
he  was  newly  come  from  the  people  that  were  gathered  thick 
together." 

The  laborious  and  numerous  attempts  from  this  passage  to 
make  out  a  case  where,  in  the  judgment  of  the  authors  of  the 
common  version,  the  verb  baptize  means  to  loash,  as  a  primary 
meaning,  demands  a  particular  and  full  exposure  of  this  bewil- 
derment of  some  men  of  learning  in  their  zeal  for  affusion.  I 
have,  therefore,  gone  into  these  details.  I  wonder  no  little,  in- 
deed, to  see  a  man  of  Professor  Stuart's  learning  and  candour 
do  so  little  honour  to  his  own  learning  and  critical  acumen,  as 
in  this  case  is  most  apparent.  His  own  party — I  mean  the  more 
profound  scholars  of  his  own  party — are  themselves  here  arrayed 
against  him.  Here  stand  Drs.  Campbell,  Rosenmuller,  Kuinoel, 
Spencer,  and  Lightfoot,  in  evidence  against  his  reasonings  and 
conclusions. 

There  are,  in  the  common  version,  some  two  or  three  other 
occurrences  of  this  erroneous  translation,  which  are  disposed  of 
by  these  investigations.  To  quote  still  farther  from  Professor 
Ripley : 

"To  sustain  the  meaning  to  wash,  three  other  passages  are 
produced  by  Professor  Stuart,  which  contain  the  substantive  de- 
rived from  the  verb  haptizo : — 

"Mark  vii.  4:  The  washings  [haptismous)  of  cups  and  pots, 
and  brazen  vessels,  and  couches,  {klinoon.) 

"  Mark  vii.  8 :  The  ivashings  [haptismous)  of  pots  and  cups. 

"  Heb.  ix.  10 :  Only  in  meats  and  drinks,  and  divers  washings, 
{haptismous.) 

"  That  the  word  rendered  loashings  in  these  passages  ought, 
so  far  as  philology  is  concerned,  to  be  rendered  immersions, 
would  be  a  plain  inference  from  the  preceding  investigations. 
And  even  though  a  difficulty  should  seem  to  arise  from  the  na- 
ture of  some  of  the  things  mentioned  by  Mark,  we  ought,  be- 
fore we  decide  that  the  word  must  have  another  meaning,  to  in- 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  399 

quire  whether  the  supposed  difficulties  really  existed  in  practice 
among  the  Jews.  It  is  by  no  means  satisfactory  to  refer  to  cus- 
toms among  ourselves,  as  suggesting  difficulties  in  respect  to 
what  the  Jeios  are  said  to  have  done  ;  and  especially  what  they 
are  said  to  have  done  by  the  influence  of  a  misguided  religious 
scrupulosity  ;  for  it  was  from  religious,  though  mistaken  consi- 
derations, that  they  practised  these  observances.  Nor  were  such 
observances  entirely  without  foundation  in  the  statutes  of  Moses. 
In  Lev.  xi.  32,  it  is  directed  that  any  vessel  upon  which  the 
dead  body  of  an  unclean  animal  had  fallen,  '  whatsoever  vessel 
it  be,  wherein  any  work  is  done,  it  must  be  put  into  water,'  in 
order  to  be  cleansed.  The  only  exception  was  in  respect  to 
earthen  vessels,  which,  being  thus  polluted,  were  to  be  broken 
in  pieces,  (ver.  33.)  Now,  how  credible  it  is,  and  how  accord- 
ant with  the  language  of  Mark,  that  the  superstitious  spirit  of  • 
the  Jews,  in  subsequent  times,  extended  this  requisition  to  other 
cases  besides  that  of  pollution  by  the  touch  of  the  dead  ;  so  that 
even  on  ordinary  occasions,  when  they  thought  religion  required 
the  articles  to  be  cleansed,  the  cleansing  must  be  performed  by 
immersing  them  in  water. 

"  And  who  can  wonder,  if  this  same  spirit  led  them  carefully  to 
cleanse  by  immersion  even  the  couches  on  which  they  reclined 
at  meals  ?  for  it  is  these,  probably,  which  are  meant  by  the  word 
translated  tables  in  our  version.  It  would  certainly  accord  well 
with  their  superstitious  disposition.  And  so  far  as  the  writings 
of  distinguished  men  among  the  Jews  enable  us  to  form  a  judg- 
ment, those  writings  contribute  altogether  to  the  belief  that 
there  was  usually  performed  an  immersion  of  these  articles, 
when  they  needed  special  purifying.  The  Jewish  rules  which 
Dr.  Gill  quotes  in  his  commentary  on  Mark  vii.  4,  are  precise 
in  requiring  such  articles  to  be  cleansed  by  being  covered  in 
water  ;  and  the  regulations  are  exceedingly  strict  in  regard  to 
this  washing,  so  that  should  there  be  any  thing  adhering  to  these 
articles,  such  as  pitch,  which  might  prevent  the  water  from 
touching  the  wood  in  a  particular  spot,  the  washing  would  not 
be  duly  performed.  The  same  Jewish  authority  requires  even 
beds  to  be  cleansed  by  immersion,  when  they  had  become  defiled. 

"  And  what  should  hinder  us  from  employing  the  word  im- 
mersions in  Heb.  x.  9  ?  Immersions  were  practised  by  the  Jews 
in  accordance  with  the  Mosaic  ritual ;  and  why  may  we  not  con- 
sider the  Apostle,  when  naming  the  immersions,  as  taking  a 
part  for  the  whole  of  the  legal  purifications,  and  consequently 
as  not  departing  from  the  specific  original  meaning  of  the  word 
he  has  employed  V 

These  matters  of  private  or  sectarian  interpretation  being  dis- 
posed of,  there  remains  scarcely  the  semblance  of  any  other  ex- 
cuse for  the  practice  of  sprinkling,  as  derived  from  any  word  or 


400  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

circumstances  named  in  the  whole  New  Testament.  True,  in- 
deed, there  are  words  and  circumstances  seized  by  some  adult 
"babes  or  babe  adults,  and  dwelt  on  with  a  zeal  and  perseverance 
worthy  of  a  martyr ;  but  in  this  case,  they  only  prove  how  strong 
in  prejudice  and  how  weak  in  reason  some  men  of  high  preten- 
sions may  be,  when  they  have  unfortunately  identified  their  for- 
tune and  their  fame  with  the  maintenance  of  a  tenet  for  which 
there  is  neither  reason  nor  faith. 

Such,  for  example,  is  the  frequent  appeal  to  the  case  of  PauFs 
baptism,  as  reported  by  Luke,  Acts  xxii.  16:  "Arise  and  be 
baptized ;"  and  again,  chap.  ix.  18 :  "  He  arose  and  was  bap- 
tized." Now,  say  they,  as  Paul  was  baptized  standing,  he  must 
•have  been  sprinkled,  and  not  immersed.  But  does  it  say  he  was 
baptized  standing? — !  No,  indeed;  but  "Arise,  and  be  bap- 
tized." What  is  this  but  the  usual  style — "  Arise,  let  us  go 
hence !"  Could  he  not  have  been  sprinkled  sitting,  or  on  his 
knees,  as  well  as  standing  up  !  In  the  same  chapter,  10th 
verse,  the  Lord  said  to  Saul,  "Arise,  and  go  into  Damascus." 
Why  not  infer  that  rising  and  going  into  Damascus  are  one  and 
the  same  thing,  or  inseparably  connected,  as  that  rising  up  and 
being  baptized  are  one  and  the  same  act,  because  connected 
in  the  same  message  or  precept.  When  candidates  present  them- 
selves for  baptism,  we  are  all  wont  to  say,  "  Arise,  let  us  go  to 
the  water,"  &c.  This,  then,  if  there  be  any  argument  in  it,  is 
doubtless  in  favour  of  immersion.  For  Ananias  would  rather 
have  called  for  water  to  be  brought,  than  to  have  commanded 
Paul  to  rise  up  and  be  baptized,  if  he  intended  sprinkling  or 
pouring.  In  truth,  this  is  an  idiomatic  expression,  common  to 
the  East  and  the  West.  On  a  thousand  occasions,  we  all  say, 
*'  Rise,  and  let  us  go  to  work'^ — "  Arise,  and  act  like  men" — not 
meaning  that  we  are  about  to  engage  in  something  that  must  be 
done  in  a  standing  position  ;  but  that  we  must  change  our  posi- 
tion in  reference  to  some  object,  whether  mental  or  corporeal. 

Next  to  the  passage  in  Mark,  there  is  one  in  Ezekiel,  that  has 
been  quoted  a  thousand  times  by  a  few  writers  and  speakers  on 
the  subject  of  "  sprinUing  water''  on  infants  and  adults.  It  is 
chapter  xxxvi.  and  verse  25  :  "  Then  will  I  sprinlde  clean  water 
upon  you,  and  you  shall  be  clean  from  all  your  filthiness,  and 
from  all  your  idols  I  will  cleanse  you."  This  promise  alludes 
to  the  separation  of  the  Jews,  through  faith  in  Christ,  from  pagan 
idols  and  from  pagan  nations,  to  be  fulfilled  in  their  conversion. 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  401 

So  the  context  indicates.  The  words  preceding  are :  "  For  I  will 
take  you  from  among  the  heathen,  and  gather  you  out  of  all  coun- 
tries, and  will  bring  you  into  your  own  land.  Then  will  I  sprinkle 
clean  water  upon  you,^'  &c.  &c.  One  would  think,  from  the  fre- 
quency and  emphasis  with  which  these  words  are  quoted  by  a 
certain  class  of  ultra  sprinklers,  that  Ezekiel  was  foretelling  and 
developing  the  ordinance  of  Christian  baptism  as  practised  by 
Bome  modern  communities.  But  a  more  irrational  play  upon  a 
word  from  grave  men,  or  from  those  who  ought  to  be  grave  men, 
is  not,  in  my  opinion,  to  be  found  in  modern  literature. 

Let  no  one  be  startled  by  the  boldness  I  assume  when  I  chal- 
lenge the  whole  world  of  sprinklers  to  show  that  water  alone 
was,  by  divine  authority,  ever  sprinkled  upon  person,  place,  or 
tiling,  in  any  religious,  moral,  political,  or  pliysical  sense  tohatever. 
I  deny  that  ever  water  alone  was  sprinkled  on  any  person  or 
thing,  by  divine  authority,  for  any  sort  of  purification,  legal  or 
evangelical,  under  any  dispensation  of  religion,  Patriarchal, 
Jewish,  or  Christian.  It  is  an  assumption  superlatively  gra- 
tuitous and  unprecedented. 

Blood,  and  oil,  and  water  mixed  with  the  ashes  of  a  blood-red 
heifer,  have  been  sprinkled  for  legal  and  ceremonial  purposes. 
Blood  alone,  oil  alone ;  but  never  water  alone,  was  divinely  or- 
dained for  such  purposes.  The  water  of  cleansing,  or  the  water 
of  purification,  sometimes  called  "the  ivater  of  separation,' '  was, 
indeed,  in  certain  cases  of  legal  uncleanness,  divinely  appointed. 
Hence  a  prescription  for  the  manufacture  of  it  is  delivered  by 
Moses,  engrossing  the  19th  chapter  of  the  book  of  Numbers. 
Yet  even  this  "  clean  water,^^  or  "  water  of  cleansing,^^  to  which 
Ezekiel  alludes,  when  sprinkled  upon  a  person  pronounced  le- 
gally unclean,  did  not,  without  baptism,  or  a  "  bathing  himself 
in  water,"  effect  any  legal  purification.  So  ignorant  are  they 
of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  who  substitute  the  Koman  Catholic 
notion  of  "  holy  water"  and  a  hair  sprinkler,  for  either  Jewish 
or  Christian  cleansing  of  person,  place,  or  thing.  Bathing  the 
whole  person  after  this  sprinkling  of  water  and  ashes,  was  in 
every  case  essential  to  any  legal  benefit. 

This  abuse  of  reason,  of  authority,  and  of  Holy  Scriptures, 
needs  only  to  be  clearly  propounded  to  any  one  that  reveres 
Bible  authority,  to  appear,  as  it  is  in  truth,  a  superstitious  and 
unwarranted  custom.  But  to  quote  a  Jewish  Prophet,  of  the 
times  of  the  captivity,  addressing  his  countrymen  on  the  subject 

34* 


402  REVIEWS  OP  THE 

of  their  restoration  to  their  own  land,  as  though  he  had  been 
teaching  Christian  ordinances  with  respect  to  admission  into  the 
church,  has  no  parallel  in  sophistry  on  this  side  the  assumptions 
of  Eoman  Catholic  manufacturers  of  "  holy  water,"  to  be  dashed 
on  every  one  that  comes  within  the  sweep  of  a  hyssop  or  hair 
sprinkler  in  the  hand  of  a  priest,  neither  of  the  tribe  nor  sense 
of  a  son  of  Levi. 

I  trust  the  candid  reader  will  excuse  me  for  adverting  to  cus- 
toms so  unfounded  in  Christianity,  and  so  revolting  to  an  edu- 
cated and  intelligent  community.  I  find  my  own  justification, 
and  I  hope  my  readers  will  find  my  pardon,  in  the  fact  that  some 
ministers  of  our  own  day  have  been  dubbed  Doctors  of  Divinity 
for  no  other  or  better  reason,  that  I  can  see,  than  their  quoting, 
with  an  air  of  glorious  triumph  on  their  brow,  Ezekiel  xxvi.  25, 
in  proof  of  their  own  dear  custom  of  baptizing  the  tip  of  their 
fingers  in  a  bason  of  water,  that  they  may  sprinkle  a  few  drops 
of  it  on  the  brow  of  a  babe,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  to  sanctify 
and  cleanse  it  for  some  end  or  purpose  which  no  one  can  define, 
much  less  defend. 

I  must  conclude  this  essay  on  punctilios,  consecrated  by 
great  names,  with  an  extract  from  Dr.  Wall,  the  most  learned 
and  candid  of  Pedobaptist  Episcopalian  ministers.  The  advo- 
cates of  sprinkling  vdll  hear  their  brother  Pedobaptist  with 
more  pleasure  than  myself.  I  will,  therefore,  courteously  dis- 
miss the  topic  with  a  few  words  from  Dr.  Wall.     He  says : — 

**  That  our  climate  is  no  colder  than  it  was  for  those  thirteen 
or  fourteen  hundred  years  from  the  beginning  of  Christianity 
here,  to  Queen  Elizabeth's  time :  and  not  near  so  cold  as  Mus- 
covy and  some  other  countries,  where  they  do  still  dip  their 
children  in  baptism,  and  find  no  inconvenience  in  it. 

"  That  the  apparent  reason  that  altered  the  custom,  was  not 
the  coldness  of  the  climate,  but  the  imitation  of  Calvin,  and  the 
church  of  Geneva,  and  some  others  thereabouts. 

"  That  our  reformers  and  compilers  of  the  liturgy  (even  of  the 
last  edition  of  it)  were  of  another  mind.  As  appears  both  by 
the  express  order  of  the  rubric  itself,  and  by  the  prayer  used 
just  before  baptism,  '  Sanctify  this  water,'  &c.,  *  and  grant  that 
this  child  to  be  baptized  therein,'  &c.;  (if  they  had  meant  that 
pouring  should  have  always,  or  most  ordinarily,  have  been  used, 
they  would  have  said  therewith;)  and  by  the  definition  given  in 
the  Catechism  of  the  outward  visible  sign  in  l)aptism :  '  Water, 
wherein  the  person  is  baptized.'  I  know  .that  in  one  edition  it 
was  said,  '  is  dipped  or  sprinkled  with  it.'    I  know  not  the  his-. 


ADVOCATES  OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  403 

tory  of  that  edition ;  but  as  it  is  a  late  one,  so  it  was  not  thouglit 
fit  to  be  continued.  The  old  edition  had  the  prayer  beforesaid 
in  these  words,  '  baptized  in  this  water.' 

"  That  if  it  be  the  coldness  of  the  air  that  is  feared,  a  child, 
brought  in  loose  blankets,  that  may  be  presently  put  off  and 
on,  need  be  no  longer  naked,  or  very  little  longer,  than  at  its 
ordinary  dressing  and  undressing — not  a  quarter  or  sixth  part 
of  a  minute. 

"If  the  coldness  of  the  water,  there  is  no  reason,  from  the  na- 
ture of  the  thing — no  order  or  command  of  God  or  man,  that  it 
should  be  used  cold  ;  but  as  the  waters  in  which  our  Saviour  and 
the  primitive  Christians,  in  those  hot  countries  which  the  Scrip- 
ture mentions,  were  baptized,  were  naturally  warm  by  reason 
of  the  climate,  so  if  ours  be  made  warm,  they  will  be  the  liker 
to  them.  As  the  inward  and  main  part  of  baptism  is  God's 
washing  and  sanctifying  the  soul,  so  the  outward  symbol  is  the 
washing  of  the  body,  which  is  as  naturally  done  by  warm  water 
as  cold.  It  may,  I  suppose,  be  used  in  such  a  degree  of  warmth 
as  the  parents  desire. 

"  As  to  those  of  the  clergy  who  are  satisfied  themselves,  and 
do  in  their  own  minds  and  opinions  approve  of  the  directions  of 
the  liturgy,  and  would  willingly  bring  their  people  to  the  use 
of  it,  it  is  too  apparent  what  difficulties  lie  in  the  way.  So  that 
this  quarreller  has  no  ground  in  his  assuming  way  to  demand, 

*  Why  do  they  continue,'  &c. 

"  The  difficulty  of  breaking  any  custom  which  has  got  pos 
session  among  the  body  of  the  people  (though  that  custom  be 
but  two  or  three  generations)  is  known  and  obvious.  And  there 
being  a  necessity  of  leaving  it  to  the  parents'  judgment  whether 
their  child  may  well  endure  dipping  or  not,  they  are  very  apt  to 
think  or  say  not;  and  there  is  no  help  for  it.  For  none,  I  think, 
will  pretend  that  the  minister  should  determine  that,  and  dip 
the  child  whether  they  will  or  not.  He  can  but  give  his  opi- 
nion— the  judgment  must  be  theirs ;  and  they  are  for  doing  as 
has  been  of  late  usual. 

•  "But  there  are,  beside  this  general,  two  particular  obstacles, 
which  it  may  be  fit  to  mention  : — 

"  1st.  One  is  from  that  part  of  the  people  in  any  parish  who 
are  preshyterianly  inclined.  As  the  Puritan  party  brought  in 
this  alteration,  so  they  are  very  tenacious  of  it ;  and,  as  in  other 
church  matters,  so  in  this  particularly,  they  seem  to  have  a  set- 
tled antipathy  against  the  retrieving  of  the  ancient  customs. 
Calvin  was,  I  think,  (as  I  said  in  my  book,)  the  first  in  the 
world  that  drew  up  a  form  of  liturgy  that  prescribed  pouring 
water  on  the  infant,  absolutely,  without  saying  any  thing  of  dip- 
ing.  It  was  (as  Mr.  Walker  has  shown)  his  admirers  in  Eng- 
and,  who,  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  brought  pouring  into 
ordinary  use,  which  before  was  used  only  to  weak  children. 


I 


404  -   REVIEWS  OP  THE 

But  the  succeeding  Presbyterians  in  England,  about  the  year 
1644,  (when  their  reign  began,)  went  farther  yet  from  the  an- 
cient way,  and,  instead  of  pouring,  brought  into  use  in  many 
places  sprinkling,  declaring  at  the  same  time  against  all  use  of 
fonts,  baptisteries,  godfathers,  or  any  thing  that  looked  like  the 
ancient  way  of  baptizing.  And  as  they  brought  the  use  of  the 
other  sacrament  to  a  great  and  shameful  infrequency,  (which  it 
is  found  difficult  to  this  day  to  reform,)  so  they  brought  this  of 
baptism  into  a  great  disregard.  Now,  I  say,  a  minister  in  a 
parish,  where  there  are  any  considerable  number  inclined  to 
this  way,  will  find  in  them  a  great  aversion  to  this  order  of  the 
rubric.  They  are  hardly  prevailed  on  to  leave  off  that  scan- 
dalous custom  of  having  their  children,  though  never  so  well, 
baptized  out  of  a  basin  or  porringer  in  a  bedchamber,  hardly 
persuaded  to  bring  them  to  church  ;  much  farther  from  having 
them  dipped,  though  never  so  able  to  endure  it. 

"2d.  Another  struggle  will  be  with  the  midwives  and  nurses, 
&c.  These  will  use  all  the  interest  they  have  with  the  mothers, 
(which  is  very  great,)  to  dissuade  them  from  agreeing  to  the 
dipping  of  the  child,  I  know  no  particular  reason,  unless  it  be 
this : — A  thing  which  they  value  themselves  and  their  skill 
much  upon,  is,  the  neat  dressing  of  the  child  on  the  christening 
day ;  the  setting  all  the  trimming,  the  pins,  and  the  laces,  in 
their  right  order.  And  if  the  child  be  brought  in  loose  clothes, 
which  may  presently  be  taken  off  for  the  baptism,  and  put  on 
again  ;  this  pride  is  lost.  And  this  makes  the  reason.  So  little 
is  the  solemnity  of  the  sacrament  regarded  by  many,  who  mind 
nothing  but  the  dress  and  the  eating  and  drinking.  But  the 
minister  must  endeavour  to  prevail  with  some  of  his  people  who 
have  the  most  regard  for  religion,  and  possibly  their  example 
may  bring  in  the  rest." 

We  will  also  hear  Dr.  Wall  reprove  his  brethren  for  their 
quibbles  about  sprinkling  : — 

"  This  [immersion]  is  so  plain  and  clear  by  an  infinite  num-* 
ber  of  passages,  that,  as  one  cannot  but  pifg  the  weak  endea- 
vours of  such  Pedobaptists  as  would  maintain  the  negative  of  it, 
so  we  ought  to  disown  and  show  a  dislike  of  the  profane  scoffs 
which  some  people  give  to  the  English  Antipedobaptists  [Bap- 
tists] merely  for  the  use  of  dipping ;  when  it  was,  in  all  proba- 
bility, the  way  by  which  our  blessed  Saviour,  and,  for  certain, 
was  the  most  usual  and  ordinary  way  by  which  the  ancient 
Christians  did  receive  their  baptism.  •'Tis  a  groat  Avant  of  pru- 
dence, as  well  as  of  honesty,  to  refuse  to  grant  to  an  adversary 
what  is  certainly  true,  and  may  be  proved  so.  It  creates  a 
jealousy  of  all  the  rest  that  one  says.     The  custom  of  tiie  Chris- 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  405 

tians  In  the  near  succeeding  times  [to  the  Apostles]  being  more 
largely  and  particularly  delivered  in  books,  is  known  to  have 
been  generally  or  ordinarily  a  total  immersion/' 

He  might  have  said  always,  rather  than  ''ordinarily." 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   EVIL   OF   INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Having  been  able  to  find  no  good  in  infant  baptism,  nor  in 
infant  sprinkling,  (for  I  must  always  consider  them  as  distinct 
things,)  I  now  proceed  to  inquire,  Is  there  any  evil  in  it  ?  In 
answering  this  question,  I  desire  to  be  guided  by  three  things 
only — Scripture,  reason,  and  fact:  neither  by  passion  nor  by 
prejudice  ;  nor,  I  trust,  will  the  fear  of  the  frown  of  any  mortal 
ever  deter  me  from  declaring  the  truth  on  this,  or  any  other 
topic  on  which  I  am  fairly  called  to  express  my  sentiments.  I 
answer  the  question  now  proposed,  with  the  utmost  coolness 
and  deliberation ;  and  feel  no  hesitation  in  declaring  that  infant 
sprinkling  is  a  manifold  evil.  This  I  shall  instance  in  a  few 
respects : — 

1st.  It  is  " will-worsTiip."  By  the  term  will-worship,  I  under- 
stand worship  founded  upon  the  will  of  man,  and  not  on  the  will 
of  God.  "In  vain  do  they  worship  me,"  saith  Christ,  "teach- 
ing for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men."  The  preceding 
pages  show  that  the  rite  of  infant  sprinkling  is  as  much  a  tra- 
dition of  men  as  the  scrutiny,  the  exsiiffiation  by  which  devils 
are  expelled,  the  insujfflation  by  which  the  Spirit  of  God  is  com- 
municated, the  consecration  of  the  wafer,  the  chrismal  unction, 
the  lighted  taper,  and  the  milk  and  honey,  which  are  but  seven 
of  the  twenty-two  appendages  to  infant  sprinkling,  made  by  the 
church  of  Rome.  Now,  as  all  will-worship  is  a  disparagement 
of  the  worship  appointed  of  God,  it  is,  consequently,  a  reflection 
upon  his  wisdom,  and  obnoxious  to  his  displeasure.  It  is  as 
contrary  to  his  revealed  will  as  the  presenting  of  "  strange  fire" 
upon  his  altar  was  in  the  days  of  Nadab  and  Abihu.  And, 
indeed,  every  religious  practice  which  is  not  founded  upon  an 
explicit  revelation  of  the  will  of  Heaven,  is  will-worship.     The 


406  REVIEWS    OF   THE 

language  of  it  is  this,  "Thou  shouldst  have  appointed  this,  and 
we  are  supplying  a  defect  in  thy  wisdom  or  goodness."  Such 
is  the  spirit  of  every  innovation  in  divine  worship. 

2d.  It  has  carnalized  and  secularized  the  church  more  than 
any  other  innovation  since  the  first  defection  from  Christianity. 
The  actual  tendency  of  infant  sprinkling  is  to  open  the  gates 
of  the  church  as  wide  as  the  gates  of  the  world,  and  to  receive 
into  its  bosom  all  that  is  born  of  woman.  That  this  may  ap- 
pear as  obvious  as  the  light  of  the  sun,  the  reader  has  only  to 
reflect  that  if  the  Pedobaptist  system  prevailed  so  that  all  the 
fathers  and  mothers  in  any  country,  or  in  all  countries,  were 
determined  to  have  their  infant  offspring  "  initiated  into  the 
churcV  as  soon  as  born,  by  the  rite  of  sprinkling,  then,  in  that 
country,  or  in  all  countries  so  acting,  the  discrimination  be- 
tween the  world  and  the  church  would  be  lost ;  its  gates  would 
be  as  capacious  as  those  of  the  world,  and,  without  the  neces- 
sity of  a  spiritual  renovation,  every  member  of  the  human 
family,  in  that  region  or  country,  would  have  a  place  in  the 
church.  About  one  hundred  years  ago,  the  whole  kingdom  of 
Scotland,  with  the  exception  of,  say,  two  or  three  thousand  in- 
dividuals, was  one  great  Pedobaptist  society.  In  those  days, 
the  church  engrossed  all  that  were  born,  and  initiated  them 
into  it.  Of  course,  all  the  enormities  committed  in  the  realm 
were  committed  by  members  of  the  church  ;  so  that  none  of  the 
apostolic  admonitions,  in  which  the  difference  between  the 
church  and  the  world  is  pointed  out,  would  apply  to  them. 

In  the  year  1300,  and  for  several  centuries  before,  all  the  citi- 
zens of  Germany,  France,  Spain,  England,  and,  indeed,  the 
whole  Western  Roman  Empire,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
Baptists,  were  initiated  into  what  was  then  called  the  Chureh, 
as  soon  as  the  parents  could  have  the  rite  performed.  In  those 
days,  and  whilst  those  principles  prevailed,  the  church  was 
secularized,  the  church  and  state  completely  amalgamated,  and 
all  the  follies  and  vices  of  childhood,  manhood,  and  old  age 
were  engrafted  upon  the  stalk  of  Christianity.  In  those  days, 
Pedobaptist  principles  triumphed,  and  there  never  was  a  period 
in  which  the  church  was  so  completely  and  universally  carnal- 
ized and  secularized.  Let  it  not  bo  said  that  this  was  owing 
more  to  other  traditions  than  to  infant  baptism  or  sprinkling ; 
for,  when  wo  grant  that  there  wore  many  other  innovations  and 
traditions  besides  this,  we  must  insist  that  this  contributed  more 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT   BAPTISM.  407 

than  they  all  to  introduce  that  awfully  corrupt  system,  called 
the  Man  of  Sin — to  nurture,  to  mature,  and  to  perfect  it.  It 
introduced  all,  good  and  bad,  into  the  church ;  and  as  bad  men 
invented  errors  and  propagated  heresies  in  the  church,  we  have 
only  to  ask  how  they  got  in,  and  then  the  true  cause  of  the 
enormous  mass  of  error  of  those  days  appears.  It  is  a  fact, 
evident  from  church  history,  that  the  prevalence  of  corruption 
in  the  church  bore  pace  with  the  prevalence  of  infant  baptism, 
and  the  triumphant  days  of  the  one  were  the  triumphant  days 
of  the  other. 

The  description  we  have  of  the  church,  in  the  Scriptures, 
leads  us  to  consider  all  the  members  of  it  as  a  "peculiar  peo- 
ple"— as  born  from  above — as  being  all  taught  of  God.  Hence 
we  read,  "A  willing  people,  in  the  day  of  thy  power,  will  come 
to  thee."  "All  thy  children  shall  be  taught  of  God,  and  great 
shall  be  the  peace  of  thy  children."  "Every  one  that  hath 
heard  and  hath  learned  of  the  Father,  cometh  unto  me."  "To 
as  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the 
sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name ;  which 
were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the 
will  of  man,  but  of  God."  Power  or  privilege  to  become  the 
sons  of  God  was  given  to  such  only  as  were  born  of  God.  How 
unlike  this  to  the  practice  of  Pedobaptists,  who  endeavour  to 
crowd  all  into  the  church  which  are  born,  not  of  God,  but  of 
the  will  of  iheflesli  and  the  will  of  man! 

Again,  when  we  read  the  descriptions  given  of  the  churches 
of  the  saints  in  the  Epistles,  they  will  not  apply  to  a  church 
that  admits  all  the  infants,  born  of  the  members,  to  member- 
ship. The  majority  of  any  such  church  must  be  of  a  character 
essentially  dissimilar  to  the  following  descriptions  of  the  church 
of  Jesus  Christ.  1  Cor.  vi.  11 :  "Ye  are  washed,  ye  are  sancti- 
fied, ye  are  justified  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by  the 
Spirit  of  our  God."  2  Thess.  ii.  13  :  "Brethren  beloved  of  the 
Lord,  God  hath  from  the  beginning  chosen  you  to  salvation, 
through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  tnithJ' 
1  Peter  ii.  5 :  "Ye  also,  as  lively  stones,  are  built  up  a  spiritual 
house,  a  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices  accept- 
able to  God  by  Jesus  Christ."  9th  verse :  "But  ye  are  a  chosen 
generation,  a  royal  priesthood,  a  holy  nation,  ?i peculiar  people; 
that  you  should  show  forth  the  praises  of  him  who  hath  called 
you  out  of  darkness  into  his  marvellous  light :  which,  in  time 


408  REVIEWS   OF   THE 

past,  were  not  a  people,  but  are  now  the  people  of  God  ;  -which 
had  not  obtained  mercy,  but  have  now  obtained  mercy/'  These, 
and  a  hundred  other  addresses  to  the  Christian  church,  are 
totally  inapplicable  to  any  Pedobaptist  church,  composed  of  a 
great  many  members  incapable  of  distinguishing  their  right 
hand  from  the  left.  When  the  question  is  proposed.  What  has 
rendered  the  Pedobaptist  churches  unworthy  to  be  addressed  in 
this  way  ?  the  answer  is.  Because  they  have  received  so  many 
members,  very  many,  that  were  merely  children  of  the  flesh ; 
nay,  the  nine-tenths  of  all  Pedobaptist  churches  became  mem- 
bers by  natural  birth ;  and,  as  the  children  of  the  flesh,  were 
constituted  members.  Infant  sprinkling  has,  then,  carnalized 
and  secularized  the  church ;  and,  hence,  all  Pedobaptist  sects 
have  become  national  churches  when  they  had  it  in  their  power; 
for  their  views  of  the  church  are  carnalized  as  well  as  the  mem- 
bers :  hence  papacy  is  the  established  religion  of  Italy,  Spain, 
France,  &c. ;  Episcopacy  of  England  and  Ireland  ;  and  Presby- 
terianism  of  Scotland.  In  the  United  States,  the  principles  of 
civil  polity  being  better  understood  than  in  any  other  country 
in  the  world,  not  any  form  of  religion  has  obtained  the  exclu- 
sive patronage  of  the  state  ;  and  may  it  continue  so,  till  all  sects 
shall  be  abolished,  and  all  the  children  of  God,  united  in  faith, 
and  hope,  and  love,  shall  know  no  bond  of  union  but  Christ — • 
when  party  names,  party  love,  and  party  zeal  shall  all  be  buried 
in  one  common  grave,  to  rise  no  more  for  ever ! 

The  second  evil  I  have  specified,  being  sufficiently  stated  and 
established,  I  proceed  to  mention  a  third  evil  resulting  from,  and 
inseparably  connected  with,  infant  sprinkling,  viz. : — 

3d.  Infant  sprinkling  imposes  a  religion  upon  the  subjects  of 
it  before  they  are  aware  of  it,  and  thus  deprives  them  of  exer- 
cising the  liberty  of  conscience  in  choosing  that  which  they 
have  examined,  and  in  refusing  that  which  they  disapprove.  It 
is  despotism  of  the  worst  kind,  to  impose  upon  the  conscience. 
It  is  the  most  despotic  act  in  the  life  of  the  greatest  despot,  to 
impose  a  religion  upon  his  new-born  infant  before  it  is  aware ; 
and,  as  soon  as  it  can  reason,  to  tell  it  that  it  vowed  so  and  so 
in  baptism,  and  that  it  would  be  a  sin  of  the  deepest  dye  if  it 
should  not,  as  soon  as  possible,  attend  to  the  things  it  had 
vowed.  This  is  to  fetter  the  exercise  of  reason,  to  rivet  on  the 
conscience  a  superstition  of  the  worst  kind,  and,  as  far  as  the 
parent  can,  for  ever  deprive  it  of  any  thing  worthy  to  be  called 


ADVOCATES   OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  409 

liberty  of  conscience.  Hence  it  is,  that  all  Pedobaptist  sects 
increase  more  by  natural  generation  than  by  any  other  means. 
Very  few  are  added  to  Romanists,  Episcopalians,  Seceders,  &c., 
in  any  other  way  than  by  ordinary  generation. 

There  is  nothing  more  congenial  to  civil  liberty  than  to  enjoy 
an  unrestrained,  unembargoed  liberty  of  exercising  the  con- 
science freely  upon  all  subjects  respecting  religion.  Hence  it  is 
that  the  Baptist  denomination,  in  all  ages  and  in  all  countries, 
has  been,  as  a  body,  the  constant  asserters  of  the  rights  of  man 
and  of  liberty  of  conscience.  They  have  often  been  persecuted 
by  Pedobaptists  ;  but  they  never  politically  persecuted,  though 
they  have  had  it  in  their  power. 

If  the  conscience  becomes  once  enslaved  by  any  undue  or 
early  imposition  upon  it,  it  is  impossible,  or  next  to  impossible, 
ever  to  assume  or  enjoy  any  thing  like  that  noble  independence 
of  mind  which  our  Saviour  taught  in  these  words,  "Call  no  man 
Master  or  Father  upon  earth ;  for  one  is  your  Father  in  heaven ; 
and  all  ye  are  brethren."  This  was  in  a  conscientious  point  of 
view.  The  dearest  liberty  on  earth  is  liberty  of  conscience ; 
and  this  lost,  all  other  liberty  is  but  a  name — "a  charm  that 
lulls  to  sleep."  It  is  an  awful  encroachment  to  encroach  on 
the  liberty  of  conscience ;  and  how  awful  to  encroach  upon, 
yea,  deprive  an  infant  of  its  liberty,  before  it  can  appreciate  the 
greatness  of  the  blessing,  or  calculate  the  magnitude  of  the  loss. 
Could  Pedobaptists  but  reflect  on  the  cruelty  of  their  practice, 
and  observe  what  an  engine  of  despotism  it  is  in  the  hands  of 
some  of  those  sects  they  despise,  how  would  they  blush  and  for 
ever  abandon  the  tradition !  Can  they  suppose  it  is  the  Spirit 
of  God  that  adds  one  million  annually  to  the  church  of  Rome  ? 
Or  that  it  is  the  Spirit  of  God  that  adds  a  hundred  thousand 
annually  to  the  church  of  England  ?  Or  can  they  believe  that 
it  is  the  same  Spirit  that  adds  a  hundred  thousand  to  the  dif- 
ferent grades  of  Presbyterians  in  the  same  space  of  time  ? — 
seeing  they  are  all  aided  by  natural  generation  and  infant 
sprinkling  !  No  ;  if  they  think  as  rational  beings,  they  cannot 
think  so.  It  is  this  rite,  and  the  vows  they  are  taught  to  consider 
themselves  under  thereby,  that  is  the  powerful  cause  of  such 
extensive  additions.  Infant  sprinkling  is,  then,  an  enthralling, 
despotic,  and  cruel  rite,  destructive  of  liberty  of  conscience  and 
injurious  to  civil  liberty.  This  will  be  farther  manifest  from 
the  following  item : — 


41 0  REVIEWS   or  THE 

4th.  Infant  sprinkling  has  uniformly  inspired  a  persecuting 
spirit.  This  is  a  heavy  charge,  and  requires  to  be  well  sup- 
ported. I  do  not,  however,  mean  to  say  that  every  PedobTiptist  has 
a  persecuting  spirit ;  or  that  every  such  church  is  necessarily  a 
persecuting  church.  No  ;  for  I  know  many  honourable  excep- 
tions ;  but  I  mean  to  say  that  infant  sprinkling  has,  as  a  system, 
inspired  all  the  parties  that  have  embraced  it  with  a  persecuting 
spirit  at  one  time  or  other,  and  they  have  manifested  it  as  far 
as  the  civil  authority  supported  them.  Nor  do  I  mean  to.  go 
back  to  tell  of  the  persecutions  of  the  church  of  Rome  in  old 
times,  which  everybody  knows:  nor  of  the  persecutions  of 
countries  far  remote  ;  but  I  will  support  the  fact  with  documents 
inore  striking,  because  more  modern,  and  because  more  within 
our  country.  I  shall  begin  with  my  own  State — the  good  old 
State  of  Virginia. 

Anno  Domini  1659,  1662,  and  1663,  several  acts  of  the  As- 
sembly of  this  State  made  it  penal  in  parents  to  refuse  to  have 
their  children  baptized ;  and  prohibited  the  Quakers  from  as- 
sembling ;  and  made  it  penal  for  any  master  of  a  ship  to  bring 
a  Quaker  into  the  State.  By  the  laws  passed  about  this  time, 
every  person  was  compelled  to  go  to  church  every  Sunday, 
under  the  penalty  of  fifty  pounds  of  tobacco.  But  Quakers 
and  non-conformists  were  liable  to  the  penalties  of  the  23d 
Elizabeth,  which  was  £20  sterling  for  every  month's  absence ; 
and,  moreover,  for  every  twelve  months'  absence,  to  give  secu- 
rity for  their  good  behaviour.  Quakers  were  farther  liable  to  a 
fine  of  two  hundred  pounds  of  tobacco  for  each  one  found  at 
one  of  their  meetings  ;  and  in  case  of  insolvency  of  any  of 
them,  those  who  were  able,  to  pay  for  the  insolvents.*  The 
persecution  of  the  Baptists  in  Virginia  did  not  extend  so  far  as 
in  some  other  States — at  least,  I  can  find  no  documents  to  autho- 
rize me  to  say  that  it  extended  farther  than  fines,  imprison- 
ments, and  the  unguarded  use  of  the  tongue.  James  Ireland,  a 
Baptist,  was  imprisoned  in  Culpepper  jail,  and  treated  very  ill 
in  other  respects,  for  his  tenets.  A  Mr.  Thomas  also,  an  active 
and  useful  minister,  was  much  persecuted.  The  olyect  of  the 
above  laws  and  persecution  was  to  protect  the  Episcopal  church, 
the  salary  of  whose  minister  was  first  settled  at  sixteen  thousand 


*  See  Ilenning's  Statutes  at  Large,  volumes  1  and  2,  for  the  above  laws,  as  quotod 
by  Mr.  Semplc. 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  411 

pounds  of  tobacco,  in  the  year  1696,  to  be  levied  by  the  vestry 
on  the  tithables  of  the  parish,  and  so  continued  to  the  Revo- 
lution. 

So  late  as  the  year  1768,  John  Waller,  Lewis  Craig,  James 
Childs,  and  others,  were  seized  by  the  sheriff  and  hauled  before 
three  magistrates,  who  stood  in  the  meeting-house  yard,  and 
who  bound  them  in  the  penalty  of  one  thousand  pounds  to  ap- 
pear at  court  two  days  after.  At  court,  they  were  arraigned  as 
disturbers  of  the  peace.  On  their  trial,  they  were  vehemently 
accused  by  a  lawyer,  who  said  to  the  court,  "May  it  please 
your  worships,  these  men  are  great  disturbers  of  the  peace ; 
they  cannot  meet  a  man  on  the  road,  but  they  must  ram  a  text 
of  Scripture  down  his  throat.^'  As  they  were  moving  through 
the  streets  of  Fredericksburg,  they  sang  the  hymn,  "  Broad  is 
the  road  that  leads  to  death."  Waller  and  his  companions  con- 
tinued in  jail  forty-three  days,  and  were  discharged  without  any 
conditions.  While  in  prison,  they  continually  preached  through 
the  grates;  and,  although  the  mob  prevented  the  people  from 
hearing  as  much  as  possible,  yet  many  heard  to  their  permanent 
advantage.  After  their  discharge,  they  preached  as  before. 
Sometimes  their  enemies  rode  into  the  water  to  mock  them  bap- 
tizing; and  often  mocked  them  when  preaching,  by  playing 
cards  and  drinking  spirits  while  they  were  preaching.  "  Two 
noted  sons  of  Belial,  who  were  notorious  for  these  practices, 
named  Kemp  and  Davis,  both  died  soon  after,  ravingly  dis- 
tracted, each  accusing  the  other  for  having  led  him  into  these 
crimes." 

*'  In  Goochland  county,  these  persecutions  raged  vehemently. 
On  the  10th  of  August,  1771,  while  a  Mr.  Webster  was  preach- 
ing from  these  words,  *  Show  me  thy  faith  without  thy  works, 
and  I  will  show  thee  my  faith  by  my  works,'  a  magistrate  pushed 
up,  and  drew  back  his  club  to  knock  him  down.  Some  person 
caught  the  club  and  prevented  mischief.  Being  backed  by  two 
sheriffs,  he  seized  Messrs.  Webber,  Waller,  Greenwood,  and 
Ware.  They  were  committed  to  prison.  They  were  retained 
thirty  days  in  close  confinement  and  fed  on  bread  and  water. 
As  they  preached  through  the  grates  and  made  many  converts, 
they  were  glad  to  let  them  go  on  their  giving  bond  for  good  be- 
haviour. A  thousand  false  reports  from  the  pulpit  and  the 
press,  misrepresenting  the  doctrines  and  practices  of  these  holy 
men,  were  among  the  means  employed  to  keep  up  this  fiery  trial. 


412  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

But  the  Revolution  took  the  power  out  of  the  hands  of  their  per- 
secutors, and  their  cause  triumphed."  This  is  a  small  specimen 
of  the  Pedobaptist  persecution  of  the  Baptists  in  Virginia,  which 
will  suffice  my  purpose  in  the  mean  time. — (See  Benedict's  His- 
tory of  the  Baptists,  vol.  2,  pp.  63-73.)  I  shall  now  quote  a 
few  facts  from  history  in  support  of  this  item,  to  show  that  not 
only  the  Pedobaptists  of  the  Episcopacy,  but  those  of  other  Pro- 
testant sects,  manifested  the  same  spirit.  In  the  good  State  of 
Massachusetts,  (which  I  select  not  as  the  only  State  in  which 
persecution  raged,  but  as  eminent  for  the  exercise  of  this  zeal,) 
the  Baptists  suffered  much  for  many  years.  In  this  State,  in 
the  year  1644,  we  are  informed  by  Mr.  Hubbard,  that  a  poor 
man,  by  the  name  of  Painter,  suddenly  became  a  Baptist ;  and 
having  a  child  born,  would  not  suffer  his  wife  to  carry  it  to  be 
baptized.  He  was  complained  of  to  the  court,  and  was  enjoined 
by  it  to  suffer  his  child  to  be  baptized.  He  had  the  impu- 
dence to  tell  them  that  infant  baptism  was  an  antichristian  ordi- 
nance :  for  which  he  was  tied  up  and  loliipped  I 

About  this  time,  a  law  was  passed  for  the  suppression  of  the 
Baptists.  After  a  long  preamble,  in  which  the  Baptists  were  ac- 
cused of  two  great  crimes — the  one,  for  denying  that  the  civil 
magistrate  could  lawfully  inspect  or  punish  men  for  any  breach 
of  the  laws  in  the  first  table  of  the  law ;  the  other,  for  saying 
that  infants  should  not  be  baptized  ;  it  concludes  with  these 
words :  "  It  is  ordered  and  agreed,  that  if  any  person  or  persons 
within  this  jurisdiction  shall  either  openly  condemn  or  oppose 
the  baptism  of  infants,  or  go  about  secretly  to  seduce  others  from 
the  approbation  thereof,  or  shall  purposely  depart  the  congrega- 
tion at  the  ministration  of  the  ordinance,  or  shall  deny  the  ordi- 
nance of  the  magistracy,  or  their  lawful  right  to  make  war,  or 
to  punish  the  outward  breaches  of  the  first  table,  and  shall  ap- 
pear to  the  court  wilfully  and  obstinately  to  continue  therein, 
after  due  time  and  means  of  conviction,  every  such  person  shall 
be  sentenced  to  banishment."  Of  this  act,  Mr.  Hubbard,  their  own 
historian,  says,  "But  with  what  success,  it  is  hard  to  say,  all 
men  being  naturally  inclined  to  pity  them  that  suffer ;  and  the 
clergy,  doubtless,  had  a  hand  in  framing  this  shameful  act,  as 
they,  at  this  time,  were  the  secretaries  and  counsellors  of  the 
legislature." 

About  this  time,  the  Westminster  Divines  sat  in  London.  A 
book  written  by  one  of  the  Baptist  ministers  was  dedicated  to 


ADVOCATES   OF   INFANT   BAPTISM.  413 

the  Westminster  Divines.  Soon  after  the  news  reached  England 
of  the  law  to  banish  the  Baptists,  Mr.  Tombes  sent  a  copy  of 
this  work  to  the  ministers  of  New  England,  and,  with  it,  an  epis- 
tle dated  from  the  Temple  in  London,  May  25,  1645,  **  hoping 
thereby  to  put  them  upon  a  more  exact  study  of  that  contro- 
versy, and  to  allay  their  vehemency  against  the  Baptists.'^ 
**  But  the  AVestminster  Assembly,"  says  Backus,  "  were  more 
ready  to  learn  severity  from  this  country,  than  these  were  to 
learn  lenity  fpom  any." 

All  letters  and  remonstrances  proved  ineffectual  with  the  New- 
England  divines.  They  held  fast  their  integrity ;  and  in  1651 
the  Baptists  were  unmercifully  whipped,  and,  not  long  after,  the 
Quakers  were  murderously  hung.* 

The  non  causa  pro  causa,  or  the  assigning  of  a  false  cause  for 
a  true  one,  is  a  form  of  sophistry  into  which  our  best  educated 
theologians  not  unfrequently  fall.  We  have  a  very  striking 
illustration  of  a  refined  species  of  this  sophism  in  the  following 
extracts  from  a  very  interesting  writer  and  tourist,  George  B. 
Cheever,  D.  D.,  an  author  of  deserved  reputation.  He  gives  to 
a  second  cause  what  is  really  due  to  the  first.  The  union  of 
Churcli  and  State  with  him  appears  to  be  the  entire  cause  of  re- 
ligious persecution.  But  who  pleads  for  and  institutes  the 
union  of  Church  and  State  ?  In  other  words,  what  is  the  cause 
of  this  union  ?  Pedohaptism  ! — I  affirm,  Pedobaptism.  The  Pe- 
dobaptists,  one  and  all,  unite  the  Church  and  the  State.  They 
would,  if  they  could,  bring  the  whole  world  into  the  church  by 
the  sheer  force  of  natural  birth,  without  a  second  birth.  Hence, 
so  far  as  their  influence  goes,  the  Church  and  State  are  united; 
In  Roman  Catholic  countries  it  is  all  Church  and  no  State.  The 
Jewish  commonwealth  is  their  heau  ideal  of  a  Christian  Church 
State.  The  whole  nation  sealed  as  soon  as  born  with  the  seal 
of  God's  covenant.  Hence,  every  Pedobaptist  church  has  perse- 
cuted in  the  ratio  of  its  power.  The  formal  union  of  Church 
and  State  is  but  the  natural  operation  of  infant  baptism.  What- 
ever, then,  we  now  cite  from  Dr.  Cheever  as  the  fruit  of  a  Church 
and  State  institution,  is  to  be  ascribed,  not  to  this  effect,  but  to 
its  cause — Pedobaptism.  AVith  this  in  mind,  we  shall  now  read 
a  few  extracts  from  the  doctor,  taken  from  his  Wanderings  of  a 
Pilgrim  in  the  Shadow  of  Mont  Blanc  and  the  Jungfrau  Alp  : — 

*  Benedict,  page  364. 
35* 


414  REVIEWS   OP   THE 

"  The  history  of  Geneva  is  singular,  as  containing  within  itself 
a  demonstration  that,  under  every  form,  both  of  truth  and  error, 
the  State  and  Church  united  are  intolerant.  The  State  oppresses 
the  Church — the  Church,  in  her  turn,  tempted  by  the  State,  op- 
presses those  who  differ  from  her,  and  so  the  work  goes  on.  At 
first  it  was  the  State  and  Romanism — the  fruit,  intolerance  ;  the 
next,  it  was  the  State  and  Unitarianism — the  fruit,  intolerance ; 
next,  it  was  the  State  and  Calvinism — the  fruit,  intolerance ;  in 
the  Canton  de  Vaud,  it  is  the  State  and  democratic  infidelity — 
the  fruit,  intolerance.  The  demonstration  is  such  that  no  man 
can  resist  its  power.  Inoculate  the  Church,  so  to  speak,  with 
the  State,  and  the  same  plague  invariably  follows  ;  no  constitu- 
tion, not  the  most  heavenly,  is  proof  against  the  virus. 

"John  Knox,  escaping  from  the  castle  of  St.  Andrews  in  Scot- 
land, and  compelled  to  flee  the  kingdom  for  his  life,  found  secu- 
rity in  Geneva,  because  there  his  religion  was  the  religion  of  the 
State.  If  it  had  not  been,  he  would  merely  have  gone  out  from 
one  fire  for  another  fire  to  devour  him.  Servetus,  escaping  in 
like  manner  from  a  Roman  Catholic  prison  in  France,  where 
he  would  otherwise  have  been  burned  in  person,  as  he  was  in 
effigy,  fled  also  to  Geneva  ;  but  his  religion  not  being  the  reli- 
gion of  the  State,  the  evangelical  republic  burned  him.  And 
thus  the  grand  error  of  the  Reformers  in  the  union  of  Church 
and  State  occasioned  what  perhaps  is  the  darkest  crime  that 
stains  the  annals  of  Reformation.  The  burning  of  Servetus  in 
Roman  Catholic  fires  would  have  added  but  an  imperceptible 
shade  to  the  blackness  of  darkness  in  a  system  which  invariably 
has  been  one  of  intolerance  and  cruelty.  But  the  man  was  per- 
mitted by  Divine  Providence  to  escape,  and  come  to  Geneva  to 
be  burned  alive  there,  by  a  State  allied  to  a  system  of  faith  and 
mercy,  to  show  to  all  the  world  that  even  that  system  cannot  be 
trusted  with  human  power ;  that  the  State,  in  connection  with 
'the  Church,  though  it  be  the  purest  church  in  tlie  world,  will 
bring  forth  intolerance  and  murder.  The  union  is  adulterous, 
the  progeny  is  sinful  works,  even  though  the  mother  be  the  im- 
bodied  profession  of  justification  by  faith.  God's  mercy  be- 
comes changed  into  man's  cruelty.  So  in  the  brightest  spot  of 
piety  then  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  amidst  the  out-shining  glory 
of  the  great  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  justification  by  faith,  God 
permitted  the  smoke  and  the  cry  of  torture  by  fire  to  go  up  to 
heaven,  to  teach  the  nations  that  even  purity  of  doctrine,  if  en- 
forced by  the  State,  will  produce  the  bitterest  fruits  of  a  cor- 
rupt gospel  and  an  infidel  apostasy ;  that  is  the  lesson  read  in 
the  smoke  of  the  funeral  pyre  of  Servetus,  as  it  rolls  up  black 
against  the  stars  of  heaven,  that  the  union  of  Church  and  State, 
even  of  a  pure  church  in  a  free  State,  is  the  destruction  of  reli- 
gious liberty. 

"It  was  this  pestiferous  evil  that  ut  one  time  banished  from 


ADVOCATES   OP   INFANT  BAPTISM.  415 

the  Genevese  State  its  greatest  benefactor,  Calvin  himself:  the 
working  of  the  same  poison  excludes  now  from  the  pulpit  of  the 
State  some  of  the  brightest  ornaments  of  the  ministry  of 
modern  times — such  men  as  Malan,  D'Aubigne,  and  Gaussen. 
It  is  true  that  it  is  the  corruption  of  doctrine  and  hatred  of  Di- 
vine truth  that  have  produced  this  last  step ;  but  it  could  not 
have  been  taken  had  the  Church  of  Christ  in  Geneva  been,  as 
she  should  be,  independent  of  the  State.  Such  measures  as 
these  are,  however,  compelling  the  Church  of  Christ  to  assume 
an  independent  attitude,  which,  under  the  influence  of  past  habit 
and  example,  she  would  not  have  taken.  Thus  it  is  that  God 
brings  light  of  darkness  and  good  out  of  evil. 

"These  are  the  views  of  great  men  in  Switzerland — Vinetand 
Burnier,  D'Aubigne  and  Gaussen  ;  and  in  this  movement  it  may 
be  hoped  that  the  evangelical  church  in  Geneva  will  yet  take 
the  foremost  place  in  all  Europe.  But  as  yet,  says  Merle  D'Au- 
bigne, '  we  are  small  and  weak.  Placed  by  the  hands  of  God 
in  the  centre  of  Europe,  surrounded  with  Popish  darkness,  we 
have  much  to  do,  and  we  are  weak.  AYe  have  worked  in  Ge- 
neva ;  and  we  maintain  there  the  evangelical  truth  on  one  side 
against  Unitarian  Rationalism,  and  on  the  other  side  against 
Papistical  Despotism.  The  importance  of  the  Christian  doctrine 
is  beginning  to  be  again  felt  in  Geneva.  Our  canton  is  becoming  a 
mixed  one,  and  we  are  assailed  by  many  Roman  Catholics  coming 
to  our  country  to  establish  themselves  there.^  Nevertheless,  our 
hope  is  strong  in  the  interposition  of  God  by  his  good  Spirit, 
which  will  yet  take  the  elements  of  evil  and  change  their  very 
nature  into  good. 

"  Dr.  Gaussen,  the  able  coadjutor  of  D'Aubigne,  and  author 
of  the  admirable  work  on  Inspiration,  entitled  Theopneustia,  was 
pastor  of  the  parish  of  Santigny,  in  the  canton  of  Geneva,  in  the 
year  1815.  It  was  about  this  time  that  he  likewise  became  a 
Christian,  and  preached  the  way  of  salvation  through  faith  in 
Christ  crucified.  In  his  teachings  among  his  flock,  Dr.  Gaussen, 
becoming  dissatisfied  with  the  Catechism  imposed  for  instruc- 
tion by  the  national  church,  principally  because  it  had  no  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  great  fundamental  truths  of  the  gospel, 
laid  it  aside,  and  proceeded  to  teach  the  children  and  candidates 
for  communion  in  his  own  way.  For  this  he  was  brought  before 
the  "  Venerable  Company  of  Pastors,"  and  finally  was  by  them 
censured,  and  suspended  for  a  year  of  his  right  to  sit  in  the  Com- 
pany. 

"  But  Dr.  Gaussen  and  his  friends,  D'Aubigne  and  others, 
nothing  terrified  by  their  adversaries,  proceeded  still  farther. 
They  framed  the  Evangelical  Society  of  Geneva,  took  measures 
for  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  in  the  city,  and  established, 
though  in  weakness  and  fear  and  in  much  trembling,  yet  in  re- 
liance upon  God,  the  Evangelical  Theological  Seminary.    Find- 


416  REVIEWS   OF  THE 

ing  that  all  eflfbrts  and  threatenings  to  prevent  or  stay  their 
career  was  in  vain,  the  Venerable  Company  proceeded,  in  1831, 
to  reject  Mr.  Gaussen  from  the  functions  of  pastor  of  Santigny, 
and  to  interdict  Messrs.  Gaussen,  Galland,  and  Merle  from  all 
the  functions  of  the  pulpit  in  the  churches  and  chapels  of  the 
canton.  What  a  spectacle  was  this  !  It  recalls  to  mind  the  ac- 
tion of  the  Genevese  republic  three  hundred  years  before,  in  the 
banishment  of  Calvin  and  Farel  from  the  city.  The  result  has 
been  happy  in  the  highest  degree.  Forced  out  of  the  national 
church,  these  men  have  been  made  to  feel  what  at  first  it  is  so  dif- 
ficult to  be  convinced  of,  that  the  church  of  Christ  belongs  to 
Christ,  and  not  to  any  nation.  They  see  that  there  is  a  new 
transfiguration,  a  new  approximating  step  of  glory  for  the  re- 
formed church  in  Europe,  in  which  she  shall  become  free  in 
Christ — shall  assume  her  true  catholicity,  her  supremacy,  her  in- 
dependence ;  becoming  for  ever  and  everywhere  a  church  in  the 
spirit,  the  truth,  and  the  liberty  of  Christ. 

*'  In  Geneva  the  church  is  in  subjection.  The  people  cannot 
choose  their  pastors ;  their  pastors  are  compelled  to  receive  every 
man  to  Christian  communion  as  an  indiscriminate  right  of  citi- 
zenship. At  a  certain  age,  every  young  man  comes  into  the 
church  by  law,*  no  matter  how  depraved,  and  declares  in  the 
most  solemn  manner  that  he  believes,  from  the  bottom  of  his 
heart,  the  dogmas  in  which  his  pastor  has  instructed  him ;  that 
he  will  still  hold  to  them,  and  renounce  the  world  and  its  pomps. 
For  entering  the  army,  for  becoming  an  apprentice,  for  obtain- 
ing any  employ,  the  young  man  must  take  the  communicant's 
oath.  Have  you  been  to  the  communion  ?  is  the  test  question — 
first  and  implacable.  Hence,  if  a  pastor  should  refuse  the  com- 
munion to  a  young  libertine,  the  candidate  and  the  whole  family 
would  regard  it  as  the  highest  insult  and  injustice,  debarring 
the  young  man  from  rights  sacred  to  him  as  a  citizen,  shutting 
indeed  the  door  of  all  civil  advancement  against  him.  To  say 
nothing  of  piety,  how  can  even  morality  itself  be  preserved  in  a 
church  in  such  degrading  subjection  to  the  civil  poAver  ? 

"  The  constitution  of  Geneva  is  such,  that  by  its  provisions 
there  is  no  liberty  of  instruction  or"  congregation  but  only  by  au- 
thority of  the  Council  of  State.  The  ninth  and  tenth  articles 
provide  that  liberty  of  instruction  shall  be  guarantied  to  all 
Genevese,  only  under  the  reserve  of  dispositions  prescribed  by 
the  laws  for  the  interest  of  public  order  and  good  manners  ;  and 
also  that  no  corporation  or  congregation  can  be  established  with- 
out the  authority  of  the  Council  of  State.  It  is  easy  to  see  that 
with  such  a  constitution  of  Church  and  State,  the  Romanists 
have  every  thing  made  easy  to  their  hand  in  Geneva,  and  only 

*  Do  not  all  come  into  the  church  by  baptism— infant  baptism,  though  'in  the 
flesh,'  and  '  naturally  depraved!  1'  A.  C. 


ADVOCATES  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM.  417 

need  a  civil  majority,  when,  by  appointing  their  own  Council  of 
State,  they  can  put  every  heretical  congregation  to  the  torture, 
and  forbid,  by  law,  any  school  or  assembly  of  instruction  or 
worship  other  than  pleases  them,  under  whatever  severity  of 
penalty  they  may  choose  to  impose.  No  wonder  that  the  cry 
of  every  Christian  patriot  in  Geneva  should  be.  Separate  Church 
and  State !  Separate  Church  and  State !  May  God  help  them 
in  their  struggle  after  liberty  V 

So,  then,  whether  in  connection  with  Orthodoxy  or  Hetero- 
doxy, Papalism,  Protestantism,  High  Church,  or  Low  Church, 
Trinitarianism  or  Unitarianism,  Pedobaptism  becomes  Church 
and  State,  and,  as  such,  persecutes  to  confiscation  of  goods, 
banishment,  and  death. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

DR.  C.  TAYLOR,  EDITOR  OF  CALMET's  DICTIONARY  OF  THE  BIBLE. 

APOSTOLIC  BAPTISM. 

"Facts"  and  "Evidences"  on  "the  Subjecta  a.nd Mode"  of  Christian  Bap- 
tism, by  C.  Taylor,  Editor  of  Calmet's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  Stereotype 
edition.    New  York,  1850.     Published  by  M.  W.  Dodd. 

This  is  a  boastful  and  boasted  performance.  It  is  affirmed  by 
the  publisher  that  "the  American  Baptists,  like  their  British 
brethren,  have  not  ventured  either  to  dispute  the  facts,*  or  to 
invalidate  the  evidences." 

Again :  it  is  affirmed  "  that  an  erudite  polemic  cannot  be  found, 
who  will  seriously  controvert  Mr.  Taylor's  oracular  position. 
Baptism,  from  the  day  of  Pentecost,  was  administered  by  the 
apostles  and  evangelists  to  infants,  and  not  by  submersion. 
Therefore,  the  subsequent  facts  and  evidences  are  as  irrefuta- 
ble as  the  truth  in  Jesus." 

Such  is  the  frontispiece  to  this  learned  duodecimo  of  236 
pages.     And  so  confident  is  the  author  of  his  positions,  that  he 

*  The  "  Facts  and  Evidences"  is  the  title  of  a  pamphlet  published  hy  the  Editor 
of  Calmet's  Dictionary,  in  1815,  "  on  the  mode  of  baptism,"  and  addressed  to  a 
Deacon  of  a  Baptist  Church,  with  two  plates,  "  showing  some  ancient  baptisms,  in 
the  porticos  of  churches." 


418  REVIEWS   OP  THE 

says,  "  for  his  facts  and  evidences  he  desires  neither  grace  nor 
favour."  P.  7.  Again  :  he  says  that  the  more  learned  Baptists 
now  confess  that  infants  are  included  in  the  term  oikos,  family, 
as  used  in  the  New  Testament ;  while  it  is  curious  to  observe 
the  difficulties  to  which  they  are  reduced,  who  contend  that  in- 
fants are  excluded  from  the  term  '^family,"*  and  that  the  word 
must  be  restricted  to  adults.  If  our  translators  had  employed 
tJie  term  family,  instead  of  the  words  house  and  household,  the 
sect  of  Baptists  never  icoidd  have  existed  I  What  a  misfortune, 
that  the  English  word  ^^  family^'  had  not  been  adopted  by  the 
Greeks,  Romans,  French,  Germans,  and  all  other  nations,  since 
its  mere  "  adoption^'  by  our  translators,  would  have  for  ever  pre- 
vented the  existence  of  that  deluded  sect  called  Baptists  ! 

This  disquisition  on  oikos  and  oikia,  with  no  less  than  twelve 
pictures,  (hallowed  number  !)  engravings  of  ancient  baptisms  in 
the  porticos  of  Roman  cathedrals  or  Greek  churches,  exhibiting 
some  water  or  oil  being  poured  on  the  head  of  the  subject,  is  the 
sum  total  of  the  volume. 

As  to  the  disquisition  on  oikos  and  oikia,  we  have  already  de- 
monstrated that  it  is  wholly  gratuitous.  If  we  should  admit 
that  oikos  and  oikia  meant  family,  and  always  family,  and  no- 
thing but  family,  unless  it  was  proved  that  every  family  must  ne- 
cessarily have  infants  in  it,  it  is  of  no  logical  force  whatever.  It 
is  mere  mockery  of  reason  and  argument — a  puerile  assumption, 
of  which  any  scholar  ought  to  be  ashamed.  We  will  most  cheer- 
fully concede  that  some  families  were  baptized  in  the  apostolic 
age,  even  many  more  than  reported.  What  then  !  AVe  still 
have  among  us  family  baptisms.  But  two  family  baptisms  are 
reported  in  the  New  Testament — Lydia's  and  the  jailer's. 
Other  households  of  baptized  persons  are  named — the  household 
of  Stephanas ;  that  of  Cornelius,  the  Centurion  ;  that  of  Onesi- 
phorus  ;  the  house  of  Chloe ;  the  house  of  Philip ;  the  house  of 
Mary,  Martha,  and  Lazarus  ;  the  house  of  Priscilla  and  Aquila. 
In  not  one  of  which  there  is  the  slightest  evidence  that  there 
was  an  infant ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  we  have  all  the  internal 
and  circumstantial  evidence  in  each,  that  in  all  the  points  in 
which  they  are  considered  or  alluded  to,  there  was  not  an  infant 


*  No  Baptist  author,  known  to  me,  has  ever  affirmed  that  infants  are  excluded 
from  the  terms  inkos  or  oikia,  but  only  from  the  families,  so  called,  in  which  bap- 
tism is  named. 


ADVOCATES   OP  INFANT  BAPTISM.  419 

in  one  of  them.  No  man  that  has  a  proper  respect  for  his  head 
and  his  heart,  or  his  education,  can,  so  far  as  we  ought  to  judge, 
argue  from  oikos,  oikia,  family,  house,  or  household,  in  favour  of 
infant  baptism.  This  argument  from  oikos  or  oikia  was  very 
satisfactorily  disposed  of  almost  thirty  years  ago,  in  my  debate 
with  Dr.  McCalla.  This  was  proved,  as  Christianity  itself  is 
sometimes  proved,  not  merely  by  the  first  acclamation,  but  by 
the  thousands  and  the  myriads  of  intelligent  Pedobaptists  that 
have,  in  our  own  time,  repudiated  it,  and,  by  overt  acts,  have 
renounced  family  and  infant  baptism,  and  voluntarily  put  on 
Christ  by  an  immersion  into  his  death. 

But,  besides  the  argument  in  favour  of  infant  baptism,  deduced 
from  the  family  baptisms  alluded  to,  we  have  no  less  than  twelve 
pictures  on  the  subject,  collected  from  the  vestibules  and  domes 
of  the  Greek  and  Roman  Catholic  churches.  The  first  is  that 
of  the  baptism  of  Christ,  placed  at  the  entrance  of  the  great 
church  at  Pisa.  Pisan  tradition  says  this  marble  ornament  was 
carried  from  Jerusalem  by  the  Crusaders,  about  the  commence- 
ment of  the  twelfth  century.  The  Baptist  stands  with  his  hand 
upon  the  Saviour's  head.  The  second  is  the  baptism  of  the  same 
subject  in  Jordan,  taken  from  the  church  on  the  Via  Ostiensis 
at  Rome.  The  door  which  it  covers  is  dated  1070.  The  third 
is  from  the  door  of  the  church  at  Beneventum,  in  Italy.  Here 
Jesus  is  standing  in  a  bath  up  to  the  middle,  and  the  Baptist  is 
pouring  water  on  his  head.  The  fourth  is  that  of  Jesus  stand- 
ing in  the  Jordan,  with  the  Baptist  pouring  water,  in  streams, 
on  his  head.  There  is  a  centrepiece  in  the  dome  of  the  baptis- 
tery at  Ravenna,  a.  d.  454.  Here  the  Baptist  stands  on  the 
bank  of  the  river,  pouring  water  out  of  a  shell  on  the  Saviour's 
head.  Over  his  head  is  a  crown  of  glory,  and  a  dove,  per- 
sonating the  Holy  Spirit,  descending  from  heaven  to  his  person. 
The  fifth  is  a  representation,  in  Mosaic,  of  the  Saviour's  baptism 
in  Jordan.  Here,  again,  a  patera,  or  a  shell,  is  employed  in 
pouring  water  on  his  person.  This  stands  in  the  church  in  Cos- 
medin,  at  Ravenna,  erected  a.  d.  401.  The  sixth  is  a  represen- 
tation of  a  bath,  or  baptismal  fount,  standing  in  the  baptistery 
of  Constantino,  in  Rome,  near  the  Lateran.  This  is  too  shallow 
for  immersion.  The  seventh  argument  is  the  baptism  of  a 
heathen  king  and  queen,  in  a  family  bath  at  Chigi,  near  Na- 
ples, with  a  priest  standing  as  if  taking  aim  at  the  king's  head, 
-with  a  pitcher  in  his  hand,  a.  d.  591.     The  eighth  proof  is  that 


420  REVIEWS  OF  THE 

of  a  kneeling  candidate,  with  a  priest  holding  a  vase,  or  pit- 
cher, at  his  head.  He  seems  to  be  on  the  dry  ground.  The 
ninth  is  that  of  a  boy,  unclothed,  receiving  a  stream  from  a 
pitcher.  This  is  found  in  Rome,  though  the  work  of  a  Greek 
artist.  The  tenth  is  Laurentius,  in  the  church  of  St.  Lawrence, 
in  Rome,  or  near  it — extra  muros — receiving  a  stream  from  a 
vase.  The  eleventh,  that  of  Constantine  the  Great,  Emperor  of 
Rome,  being  immersed  in  a  bath ;  but  also  receiving  a  stream 
of  oil  or  water  falling  upon  his  head  from  a  vial,  held  by  a  long- 
robed  priest.  The  twelfth  is  that  of  Jesus  Christ,  baptized  by 
John  in  the  Jordan,  standing  on  the  bank,  with  one  hand  on 
or  near  to  his  head.  No  shell  nor  vial  is  seen  in  the  picture. 
Probably,  the  baptizer  had  dipped  his  finger  in  the  Jordan. 
This  stands  in  the  chapel  of  the  baptistery,  in  the  small  church 
of  the  Catacomb  Pontianus,  with  a  lamb  at  his  foot.  The  bap- 
tizers,  though  I  have  called  them  priests,  from  their  costume, 
are  said  to  have  been  laymen;  and  Mr.  Taylor  admits  the  allega- 
tion, and  quiets  all  scruples  by  the  concession,  that,  in  all 
extreme  cases,  baptism  by  the  hand  of  laymen  is  of  Divine  au- 
thority, and,  consequently,  canonical  and  valid. 

Now,  the  grand  and  solemn  question  is,  What  does  all  this 
prove  ?  It  proves  not  when  the  custom  began,  nor  when  these 
pictures  were  made;  and  if  it  did,  they  are  all  hundreds  of  years 
too  late  to  prove  primitive  apostolic  baptism.  No  one  can,  with 
any  measure  of  self-respect,  deny  this.  And  this  admitted, 
places  these  twelve  arguments  on  the  shelf,  lettered,  "old  wives' 

FABLES !" 

In  the  next  place,  statuaries,  sculptors,  and  painters  are  al- 
ways fond  of  catering  to  public  taste  and  fashion,  and  will  make 
to  order  any  number  of  marble  or  other  ornaments,  just  as  Mr. 
Sartain,  in  his  pictorial  magazine,  or  as  printers  do  in  the  Fa- 
mily Bible — make  such  representations  of  angels,  men,  cos- 
tumes, and  customs,  as  will  command  the  highest  admiration, 
secure  the  largest  sale,  and  the  most  liberal  price. 

Thus,  we  see  in  one  New  Testament,  in  an  orthodox  pulpit, 
quite  as  sacred  as  the  vestibule  of  St.  Peter's,  or  the  dome  of 
St.  Paul's,  a  pictorial  representation  of  Paul's  conversion.  The 
admiration  and  taste  of  the  artist  conceived  that  it  would  be 
more  pleasing  to  present  Paul  as  a  fine,  athletic-looking  man, 
mounted  on  a  fiery  Arabian  courser,  on  his  way  to  Damascus. 
And  when  arrested  on  his  journey,  by  a  glance  of  the  Lord  and 


ADVOCATES   Or  INFANT  BAPTISM.  421 

the  majesty  of  his  voice,  the  affrighted  steed,  springing  like  a 
deer  from  its  lair,  in  frenzied  mood  plunging  in  the  desert, 
unsaddles  his  rider  and  flings  him  over  his  head ;  while  the  un- 
horsed apostle,  pertinacious  of  his  hold  of  the  bridle,  brings 
him  to  the  ground,  and  appears  as  if  about  to  rise,  whip  iu 
hand,  with  full  intent,  in  sad  distraction,  wildly  looking  hither 
and  thither,  as  if  to  lay  upon  him  the  weight  of  his  indignant 
arm.  How  suitable  to  such  an  event  is  such  a  scene,  however 
well  executed  and  elegantly  decorated  by  the  hand  of  a  gifted 
artist ! 

Again:  open  our  elegant  Family  Bibles  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  and  what  idea  do  they  give  of  the  Saviour's  bap- 
tism in  the  Jordan !  You  will  see  opposite  to  the  account  of 
his  baptism,  or  on  the  frontispiece  of  the  volume,  John  the  Im- 
merser,  alias,  John  the  Baptist,  standing  upon  a  bluff  bank  of 
the  Jordan,  or,  in  other  pictures,  standing  ankle-deep  in  its  mar- 
gin, lifting  up  a  handful,  or  pouring  a  hornful,  of  the  water  of 
the  river  upon  his  head ;  while  a  dove,  on  its  wing,  is  descend- 
ing from  an  open  sky,  in  the  direction  of  the  imposing  scene. 
Now,  what  does  this  prove,  but  the  ignorance  or  impiety  of 
painters  of  the  present  day?  And  just  so  much,  neither  more 
nor  less,  do  these  twelve  pictures,  the  twelve  unanswerable  ar- 
guments of  C.  Taylor,  in  favour  of  the  pagan  rite  of  sprinkling 
holy  water,  under  the  imposing  name  of  Christian  baptism, 
alias,  Roman  rantism  !  It  is  a  fearful  deception  practised  upon 
the  credulity  of  an  untaught  and  unteachable  population.  "0 
my  people,  they  which  lead  thee  (or  call  thee  blessed)  cause 
thee  to  err,  and  destroy  the  way  of  thy  paths  !"*  "  They  have 
spoken  lying  words  in  my  name,  which  I  have  not  commanded 
them;  even  I  know  and  am  a  witness,  saith  the  Lord.'^f 


*  Isa.  iii.  12.  t  Jer.  xxix. 


422  QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  X. 

ONE    HUNDRED  AND   THIRTY-FOUR   QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT   BAPTISM. 

We  design  this  essay  especially  for  the  most  uneducated  por- 
tion of  the  reading  community :  embracing  in  its  details  the 
whole  subject,  action,  and  design  of  baptism.  We,  therefore, 
adopt  the  method  of  question  and  answer,  as  most  instructive 
and  impressive ;  only  premising  that  our  answers  shall  always 
be  those,  and  those  only,  which  the  Holy  Scriptures,  history, 
and  human  experience  authenticate  and  sustain. 

Quenj  1.  Who  was  the  first  Baptist  ?  Answer.  John,  the  har- 
binger of  Christ,  called  "JoJm  the  Baptist." 

Q.  2.  From  whom  did  he  receive  authority  to  baptize  ? 
A.  Not  from  men,  but  from  God.  He  was  sent  by  God  to  bap- 
tize, and  did  not  institute  it  himself,  nor  learn  it  from  the  Jews. 
John  i.  33. 

Q.  3.  Where  did  he  baptize?  A.  In  the  Jordan,  and  at  Enon, 
"because  there  was  much  water  there." 

Q.  4.  Did  those  he  baptized  make  confession  ?  A.  They 
*'were  baptized  by  him  in  the  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins." 

Q.  5.  Were  they  led  or  carried  to  his  baptism?  A.  "There 
went  out  to  him  Jerusalem,  and  all  Judea,  and  all  the  region 
round  about  the  Jordan,  and  were  baptized  by  him  in  the  Jor- 
dan." 

Q.  G.  Who  was  the  most  distinguished  person  whom  he  bap- 
tized ?     A.  The  Saviour  of  the  world. 

Q.  7.  For  what  purpose  was  he  baptized  ?  A.  Neither  for 
confessing  his  sins,  nor  for  receiving  remission  of  them  ;  but 
"  to  fulfil  all  righteousness,"  or  to  honour  the  righteous  iuHtitu- 
tions  of  God.  "Thus,"  said  he,  "it  becomes  us  to  fulfil  all 
righteousness,"  or  observe  every  Divine  institution. 

Q.  8.  How  old  was  Jesus  when  baptized  ?  A.  About  tliirty 
years  old. 

Q.  9.  Had  Jesus  been  circumcised  when  an  infant?  A.  He 
was  circumcised  the  eighth  day. 

Q.  10.  Had  all  those  that  John  baptized  been  circumcised  ? 
A.  Yes :  they  were  all  Jews. 


QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT  BAPTISM.  423 

Q.  11.  What  do  you  infer  from  this  fact  ?  A.  That  baptism 
did  not  come  in  the  room  of  circumcision ;  otherwise  no  Jews 
would  have  been  baptized. 

Q.  12.  When  was  Christian  baptism  introduced  ?  A.  Not 
till  John  the  Baptist  had  been  beheaded,  and  Jesus  Christ  cru- 
cified ;  almost  four  years  after  the  baptism  of  John. 

Q.  13.  Where  was  it  instituted  ?  ^.  On  a  mountain  of  Gali- 
lee. 

Q.  14.  By  whom  ?    A.  By  the  Saviour  in  person. 

Q.  15.  In  what  words  ?  A.  "Go,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have 
commanded  you ;"  or,  according  to  the  Evangelist  Mark,  "  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world ;  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  be- 
lieveth  not  shall  be  damned." 

^.16.  To  whom  was  this  commission  given?  A.  To  the 
Apostles  of  Christ. 

Q.  17.  When  and  where  did  they  begin  to  act  under  it  ? 
A.  On  the  first  Pentecost  after  the  ascension  of  Jesus  into  hea- 
ven, and  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem. 

Q.  18.  How  many  were,  there  and  then,  baptized  ?  A.  Three 
thousand  souls. 

Q.  19.  What  qualification  was  required  by  the  Apostles  act- 
ing under  this  commission  ?    A.  Repentance. 

Q.  20.  Repeat  the  words.  A.  *'  Repent  and  be  baptized,  every 
one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 

Q.  21.  Any  other  indication  implying  whether  none  but  pro- 
fessed, believing  penitents  were  baptized  on  that  occasion  ? 
A.  "  They  that  gladly  received  his  word  were  baptized."  Acts 
ii.  41. 

Q.  22.  Are  infants  capable  of  understanding,  believing,  and 
gladly  receiving  a  preached  gospel  ?  A.  Not  such  as  we  have 
in  this  age  of  the  world. 

Q.  23.  What,  then,  would  you  infer  concerning  the  first  three 
thousand  persons  baptized  by  the  Apostles  of  Christ  ?  A.  That 
there  were  no  infants,  nor  families  having  infants,  baptized  by 
the  Apostles  in  establishing  the  first  Christian  church  ever 
planted  on  earth. 

Q.  24.  Had  all  the  males  baptized  by  the  Apostles  on  this 
occasion  been  circumcised  ?    A.  Being  Jews,  they  must  have 


424  QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

been  circumcised;  for  the  Jews  were  called  "the  circumci- 
sion." 

Q.  25.  And  what  would  you  infer  from  this?  A.  That  bap- 
tism was  not  a  substitute  for  circumcision,  as  some  vainly  ima- 
gine ;  for,  then,  how  could  the  Apostles  have  baptized  those 
who  had  been  circumcised  ? 

Q.  26.  AVhat  accommodations  were  there  for  baptism  in  Jeru- 
salem ?  A.  There  were  pools  of  water,  public  and  private 
baths  in  Jerusalem,  as  well  as  the  brook  Kedron,  near  the  pub- 
lic garden  where  Jesus  oft  resorted  with  his  disciples. 

Q.  27.  Where  did  the  second  great  baptism  occur  ?  A.  In 
Samaria. 

Q.  28.  How  is  it  reported  ?  A.  Philip,  an  Evangelist,  went 
down  from  Jerusalem,  after  many  thousands  had  been  baptized 
there,  to  the  city  of  Samaria,  and  preached  to  them  the  same 
gospel.  Many  of  the  Samaritans,  we  are  informed,  "hearing, 
believed  and  were  baptized,  both  men  and  women." 

Q.  29.  Why  did  not  the  history  say,  "Men,  women,  and  chil- 
dren?" A.  Because,  I  presume,  there  were  no  children;  for,  in 
being  so  particular  in  detailing  who  heard,  believed,  and  were 
baptized,  so  far  as  to  respect  the  sex  of  the  parties,  the  same 
particularity  would  have  induced  him  to  have  added  children, 
had  children  been  amongst  them.  Thus  it  is  that  silence, 
by  force  of  circumstances,  is  sometimes  equivalent  to  a  nega- 
tive. 

Q.  30.  But  is  not  this  clearly  indicated  in  the  context  ? 
A.  Yes.  In  the  qualifications  of  those  baptized,  there  are  enu- 
merated those  which  exclude  the  conception  of  speechless  babes. 
We  are  informed  that  they  believed  Philip,  hearing  and  seeing  the 
miracles  which  he  performed,  before  they  were  baptized.  They 
were  capable  of  seeing  or  contemplating  a  miracle,  of  perceiv- 
ing the  meaning  of  it,  and  of  believing  the  preacher  before  they 
were  baptized. 

Q.  31.  Were  the  Samaritans  circumcised  persons?  A.  Yes: 
they  were  the  circumcised  children  of  the  covenant  that  God 
X  made  with  Abraham ;  for,  though  at  this  time  a  mongrel  people, 
they  practised  circumcision. 

Q.  32.  Having,  then,  found,  neither  amongst  the  Jews  at  Je- 
rusalem, nor  amongst  the  mongrel  Jews  of  Samaria,  a  single 
instance  of  baptism  without  a  previous  hearing  and  believing, 
or  professing  of  faith  in  the  Muosiah,  wc  have  all  scriptural  cvit 


QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT   BAPTISM.  425 

dence  against  infant  sprinkling  or  infant  baptism ;  to  whom 
shall  we  next  look  ?     A.  To  the  next  case  reported. 

Q.  33.  And  what  is  the  next  case  reported?  A.  It  is  that  of 
the  Ethiopian  officer,  treasurer  of  an  Ethiopian  queen,  who 
heard  Philip  preach  the  same  gospel,  and  was,  on  profession  of 
that  faith,  baptized  in  a  certain  water  to  which  they  came  on 
their  journey. 

Q.  34.  And  what  was  the  next  baptism  reported  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  ?  A.  It  is  that  of  Saul  of  Tarsus.  Doubtless, 
he  was  a  believing  subject. 

Q.  35.-  And  how  was  he  baptized  ?  A.  Neither  while  sitting 
nor  standing.  We  are  not  informed  in  what  place,  but  that  he 
was  commanded  to  arise,  and,  of  course,  to  accompany  Ananias 
somewhere.  "Arise,"  said  he,  "why  tarriest  thou,  and  be  bap- 
tized, and  wash  away  your  sins,  calling  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord."  He,  accordingly,  arose  and  accompanied  him  to  a  suit- 
able place,  and  was  baptized. 

Q.  36.  Having  now  seen,  from  an  induction  of  the  first  con- 
verts in  Jerusalem,  Samaria,  Damascus,  and  Ethiopia,  that  all 
baptized  persons  were  first  taught  and  instructed  in  the  way  of 
the  Lord  '^efore  their  baptism,  and  not  one  indication  of  a  dif- 
ferent practice,  what  is  wanting  to  complete  this  chapter  of 
evidences?  A.  We  must  look  from  the  Jews — whether  in 
Jerusalem,  Samaria,  Damascus,  or  Ethiopia — to  the  Gentiles. 
Perhaps,  there  was  a  different  dispensation  of  baptism  to  the 
Gentiles. 

Q.  37.  And  what  were  the  circumstances  of  the  baptism  or 
conversion  of  the  aliens  ?  A.  The  Gentiles  were,  indeed,  aliens 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  strangers  to  the  cove- 
nants of  promise.  But  admission  to  the  new  dispensation  was 
proposed  to  Jews  and  Gentiles  on  the  same  premises,  because 
God  is  not  a  God  of  the  Jews,  but  of  the  Gentiles  also  ;  and  he 
made  no  difference,  says  an  Apostle,  between  them,  "purifying 
their  hearts  by  faith." 

Q.  58.  But  give  us  a  case.  Where  was  the  first  baptism  of 
Gentiles  ?  A.  At  Cesarea.  Cornelius,  an  Italian  captain,  an 
intelligent,  pious,  and  prayerful  soldier,  with  his  family  and 
personal  friends,  were  the  first-fruits  of  the  nations  to  Christ. 
All  the  converts  of  that  day  heard,  believed,  and  received  the 
Holy  Spirit  before  they  were  baptized.  It  was  in  reference  to 
these  that  Peter  challenged  the  Jews,  his   companions  from 


426  QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Joppa,  asking  if  any  of  them  dare  refuse  baptism  to  these  en- 
lightened and  sanctified  pagans.  He  then  commanded  them, 
so  distinguished  with  knowledge,  faith,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  to 
be  baptized  in  the  name,  or  by  the  authority,  of  the  Lord. 
Such  Gentiles,  then,  as  believed  and  were  enlightened,  were  to 
be  baptized  by  the  authority  of  the  Lord. 

Q.  39.  Have  we  any  other  public  baptisms  reported  among 
the  Gentiles?  A.  We  have  the  baptism  of  the  Corinthians, 
under  the  ministry  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

Q.  40.  What  are  the  details  of  their  baptism  ?  A.  We  are 
solemnly  told,  that  many  of  the  Corinthians,  hearing,  believed, 
and  were  baptized. 

Q.  41.  Had  infant  baptism  been  preached  in  those  days,  how 
would  it  have  read?  A.  "Many  infants,  being  baptized,  be- 
lieved and  heard." 

Q.  42.  Would  it  not  be  incongruous  to  say,  that  they  first  be- 
lieved and  then  heard  ?  A.  Not  in  the  least  more  unprece- 
dented or  more  unreasonable  than  to  say,  that  they  were  first 
baptized  and  then  believed.  According  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles, and  the  tenor  of  the  New  Testament,  it  is  as  good  sense, 
as  good  style,  and  as  fully  authorized,  to  say,  many  infants  first, 
believed  and  then  heard  the  gospel,  as  to  say,  many  infants 
were  baptized  and  then  believed  the  gospel. 

Q.  43.  But  is  it  generally  true,  in  fact,  that  baptized  infanta 
do  afterwards  believe  the  gospel  ?  A.  It  may  sometimes  hap- 
pen :  but  experience  or  accurate  observation  would  prove,  ac- 
cording to  our  observation,  that,  taking  Pedobaptist  Christendom 
into  the  account,  not  a  tithe  of  baptized  infants  do  really  ever 
believe  the  gospel. 

Q.  44.  Of  sixty  millions  of  Russian  baptized  infixnts — of  one 
hundred  millions  of  Roman  sprinkled  infants — and  of  fifty  mil- 
lions of  Lutheran,  and  Episcopal,  and  Presbyterian,  and  Metho- 
distic  sprinkled  or  poured  infants,  can  any  one  reasonably  con- 
clude, from  all  published  data,  that,  in  the  aggregate,  ten  or 
eleven  millions  of  them  really  and  truly  believe  the  gospel  to 
the  salvation  of  their  souls  ?  ^.  If  so,  surely  the  millennium 
must  be  at  the  door. 

Q.  45.  Waiving  all  matters  of  doubtful  disputation  on  the 
premises,  what  is  laid  down  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  as  the 
in«li8pcn8a]>le  qualifications  necessary  to  baptism?  A.  "If  thou 
bclicvcat  with  all  thy  heart,  thou  mayest.'' 


QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT   BAPTISM.  427 

Q.  46.  Did  you  ever  read  of  the  baptism  of  any  infants  in  the 
Scriptures  ?     A.  No. 

Q.  47.  Did  you  ever  read  of  the  sprinkling  of  any  infants  in 
the  Scriptures  ?    A.  No. 

Q.  48.  Whose  commandment,  then,  do  vre  obey  in  having 
our  infants  baptized  or  sprinkled  ?  A.  The  commandment  of 
the  clergy. 

Q.  49.  Do  we  transgress  any  Divine  command  in  neglecting 
to  have  our  infants  baptized  ?  A.  No  :  I  never  read  of  any  one 
being  accused  of  this  sin  in  the  Bible,  nor  of  any  commandment 
that  was  thereby  transgressed. 

Q.  50.  Did  you  ever  read  of  any  sponsors  in  the  Bible  ? 
A.  No. 

Q.  51.  "What  do  you  mean  by  a  sponsoi'?  A.  I  mean  one 
that  promises  and  engages  for  another  in  baptism. 

Q.  52.  Did  you  ever  read  in  the  Scriptures  of  any  one  pro- 
mising any  thing  for  another  in  baptism  ?  ^.  No  :  no  pro- 
mise of  parent  nor  child,  at  baptism,  is  ever  mentioned  in  the 
Bible. 

Q.  53.  Whence  originated  the  custom  of  promising  and  vow- 
ing in  baptism  ?     A.  From  the  clergy. 

Q.  54.  Did  you  ever  read  in  the  Scriptures  of  any  vows 
that  minors  or  adults  were  under  in  consequence  of  baptism  ? 
A.  None. 

Q.  55.  What  are  the  promises  given  to  baptized  infants  or 
minors,  in  the  New  Testament  ?     A.  None. 

Q.  56.  What  are  the  threats  denounced  against  them  that 
neglect  to  have  their  infants  baptized?  A.  Many  from  the 
clergy,  but  none  from  the  Bible. 

Q.57.  Is  Baptism  a  command?  A.  Yes:  "Be  baptized,  every 
one  of  you.'' 

Q.  58.  Should  not  every  Divine  command  be  obeyed?  A.  Yes. 

Q.  59.  In  what  does  religious  obedience  consist  ?  ^.  In  a 
voluntary  act  of  an  intelligent  agent. 

Q.  60.  Is  a  person  active  or  passive  in  obeying  a  command  ? 
A.  Active. 

Q.  61.  Is  an  infant  active  or  passive,  conscious  or  uncon- 
scious, in  receiving  baptism  ?    A.  It  is  passive  and  unconscious. 

Q.  62.  Can  a  being  that  is  passive  and  unconscious  in  suffer- 
ing an  action,  be  said  to  be  obeying  a  command  in  that  same 
action  ?    ^.  By  no  means. 


428  QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Q.  63.  Can  those  persons  who  have  been  baptized  in  Infancy 
be  said,  on  the  foregoing  principles,  to  have  obeyed  the  Divine 
command,  "Be  baptized ?''     A.  No:  impossible. 

Q.  64.  Is  baptism  an  act  of  religious  worship  ?  A.  Yes : 
all  Divine  ordinances  were  appointed  for  us  to  worship  God 
thereby. 

^.65.  How  must  acceptable  worship  be  performed?  A.  "In 
spirit  and  in  truth."  "God  is  a  Spirit;  and  they  that  worship 
him  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 

Q.  66.  Can  unthinking  and  unconscious  infants  worship  God 
in  spirit  and  in  truth  ?     A.  No. 

Q.  67.  Can  they,  then,  in  conformity  with  these  principles, 
be  baptized  as  an  act  of  religious  worship  ?     A.  No. 

Q.  68.  Is  baptism  appointed  for  the  benefit  of  the  subject? 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  69.  Are  there  any  benefits  resulting  from  baptism  in  this 
life  ?     A.  Many. 

Q.  70.  What  are  the  benefits  resulting  from  baptism  in  this 
life  ?  A.  They  are  briefly  comprehended  in  one  sentence — viz. 
"The  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God."  1  Pet.  iii.  21. 

Q.  71.  In  what  does  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  consist? 
A.  In  three  things : — 1st.  The  knowledge  of  the  meaning  of 
baptism.  2d.  A  belief  of  the  fact  and  import  of  the  death  and 
resurrection  of  Christ,  to  which  baptism  refers.  3d.  In  the  con- 
sciousness of  our  own  minds  that  we  have  voluntarily  and  intel- 
ligently obeyed  the  Divine  command.  See  Rom.  vi.  1-6  ;  1  Pet. 
iii.  20-22. 

Q.  72.  Can  any  infant  be  conscious  of  these  things  in  bap- 
tism ;  or  can  it  afterwards  reflect  that  it  intelligently,  volunta- 
rily, and  cheerfully  obeyed  the  Divine  command?  A.  It  is  ut- 
terly impossible. 

Q.  73.  Is  there,  then,  no  way  in  which  an  infant  can  obtain 
by  reflection  or  otherwise,  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  from 
baptism  ?     A.  None. 

Q.  74.  Can  an  adult,  when  instructed  in  the  import  of  bap- 
tism, receive  any  consolation  from  reflecting  that  his  parents 
had  him  baptized  when  an  infant  ?  A.  No,  unless  it  be  a  delu- 
sive consolation  ;  fur  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  can  only 
be  enjoyed  through  an  inward  consciousness  that  the  subject 
has  intelligently  and  voluntarily  obeyed  a  Divine  command- 
ment. 


QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT   BAPTISM.  429 

Q.  75.  How  does  any  adult  know  that  lie  was  baptized  in  in- 
fancy?    A.  By  the  report  of  others, 

Q.  76.  Is  there  any  duty  inculcated  in  the  New  Testament 
that  requires  us  only  to  have  the  testimony  of  others  for  our  hav- 
ing performed  it  ?     A.  Not  one. 

Q.  77.  Is  there  any  promise  accompanying  our  obedience  to 
the  commands  of  God  ?  A.  Yes  :  "  In  keeping  of  them  there  is 
a  great  reward."  Ps.  xix.  11 ;  Prov.  iii.  16-18,  xi.  18,  xxix.  18  j 
Heb.  xi.  6-26  ;  James  i.  25. 

Q.  78.  Is  there  any  reward  accompanying  infant  baptism  ? 
A.  None,  except  "the  praise  of  men." 

Q.  79.  Is  there  any  peculiar  promise  accompanying  baptism  ? 
A.  Yes ;  the  promise  of  the  Divine  Spirit  as  a  "  Comforter.^' 
Acts  ii.  38,  xix.  2-7. 

Q.  80.  What  were  the  immediate  duties  of  those  baptized  ? 
A.  Union  with  the  church  and  obedience  to  all  the  command- 
ments and  ordinances. 

Q.  81.  How  soon  were  the  baptized  added  to  the  church? 
A.  "  That  same  day,''  "and  they  continued  steadfastly  in  the 
Apostles'  doctrine,  in  breaking  of  bread,  in  fellowship,  and  ia 
prayers."  Acts  ii.  41,  42. 

Q.  82.  Is  this  true  of  any  infants  after  baptism?  A.  No  ;  it 
never  was,  nor  in  the  nature  of  things  can  it  ever  be. 

Q.  83.  What  is  the  necessary  qualification  to  all  parts  of 
Christian  practice  ?     A.  Faith. 

Q.  84.  Is  there  no  Christian  duty  to  be  performed  without 
faith  in  the  subject?     A.  None. 

Q.  85.  Why  so  ?  A.  Because  "  without  faith  it  is  impossibly 
to  please  God."  Heb.  xi.  6. 

Q.  86.  Can  it  then  be  pleasing  to  God  to  baptize  or  sprinkle 
infants  ?  A.  No,  seeing  that  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to 
please  God. 

Q.  87.  Can  the  infant  itself,  in  receiving  this  rite,  please  God? 
A.  No ;  for  it  is  destitute  of  faith. 

Q.  SS.  How  do  you  know  that  infants  are  destitute  of  faith  ? 
A.  Because  they  cannot  believe  in  him  of  whom  they  have  never 
heard  !  As  saith  the  Apostle,  Eom.  x.  14,  "  How  shall  they  be- 
lieve in  him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard  ?" 

Q.  89.  But  may  there  not  be  two  kinds  of  baptism — one  suited 
to  believers,  and  one  to  infants  destitute  of  faith  ?  A.  No  ;  for 
the  Scriptures  speak  only  of  am  baptism. 


430  QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Q.  90.  Why  did  John  baptize  at  Enon  ?  A.  "  Because  there 
was  much  water  there." 

^.91.  Would  not  a  few  quarts  of  water  baptize  hundreds  ? 
A.  No ;  a  few  quarts  might  sprinkle  hundreds,  but  could  not 
baptize  one. 

Q.  92.  Who  appointed  the  sprinkling  of  infants  ?  A.  The 
clergy. 

Q.  93.  When  did  sprinkling  become  general  among  Roman 
Pedobaptists  ?  A.  The  Pope,  in  the  year  1311,  declared 
sprinkling  or  immersion  as  indifferent — either  would  do  very 
well.  But  in  England,  it  did  not  become  general  till  after  the 
reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 

Q.  94.  Why  do  you  sprinkle  water  upon  the  face  ?  A.  Be- 
cause thus  the  Clergy  have  ordained. 

Q.  95.  Why  do  they  not  sprinkle  the  foreskin,  seeing  the  Jews 
circumcised  it  ?     A.  Because  it  would  be  indecent  and  impolite. 

Q.  96.  Was  not,  then,  circumcision  indecent  and  impolite? 
A.  No;  for  it  was  commanded  of  God. 

Q.  97.  Can  you  give  no  better  reason  for  sprinkling  the  face 
than  that  given  ?  A.  No  ;  the  clergy  have  pitched  upon  it,  and 
perhaps  they  had  some  reason  for  it. 

Q.  98.  To  what  is  baptism  compared  in  the  New  Testament  ? 
A.  To  a  burial  and  resurrection.  Rom.  vi.  4-6. 

Q.  99.  Does  sprinkling  the  face  represent  a  burial  ?     A.  No. 

Q.  100.  Does  immersing  the  whole  person  resemble  a  burial? 
A.  Yes  ;  *'  We  are  buried  with  him  in  baptism." 

Q.  101.  Does  a  child  carrying  away  from  the  preacher  resem- 
ble a  resurrection  ?     A.  No. 

Q.  102.  How,  then,  is  the  resurrection  exhibited  ?  A.  After 
the  subject  has  been  immersed  in  water  and  completely  over- 
whelmed in  it,  his  rising  up  out  of  the  water  is  an  emblem  of  a 
resurrection. 

Q.  103.  Is  baptism  compared  to  any  thing  else  in  the  Scrip- 
tures ?  A.  Yes  ;  to  the  regenerating  influences  and  operation 
of  the  Spirit  of  God.  Hence  we  read  of  "  the  washing  of  rege- 
neration" and  of  the  "  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Q.  104.  Is  sprinkling  an  emblem  of  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  ? 
A.  No. 

Q.  105.  What  is  there  in  immersion  in  water  that  is  an  em- 
blem of  the  regenerating  operation  of  the  Spirit?  A.  The  ap- 
plication of  water'  to  the  whole  person  of  the  subject,  and  the 


QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM.  431 

consequent  "putting  off  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,"  is  an  emblem 
of  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  whole  soul  of  man,  affect- 
ing the  understanding,  will,  and  affections,  and  the  consequent 
"  putting  off  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh,"  or  "the  old  man  with  his 
deeds."  This,  immersion  beautifully  exhibits  ;  but  sprinkling 
cannot. 

Q.  106.  How  shall  an  illiterate  man  know  the  meaning  of  the 
Greek  word  baptism  ?  A.  By  inquiring  how  the  Greek  church 
practise  this  rite.  It  is  certain  they  ought  to  understand  their 
own  language  best. 

Q.  107.  And  how  does  the  Greek  church  administer  this  or- 
dinance ?  A.  Even  to  this  day  they  immerse  every  subject,  in 
all  climes,  and  in  all  cases  in  which  they  may  be  placed. 

Q.  108.  Has  not  immersion  in  cold  water  been  a  dangerous 
practice  ?  A.  No  ;  in  the  frozen  regions  of  Russia  and  Canada, 
in  the  midst  of  the  coldest  winters,  and  in  the  warmest  climates 
of  the  torid  zone,  it  has  been  practised  without  danger,  and  with 
manifest  safety  to  the  administrators  and  subjects. 

Q.  109.  Why  was  sprinkling  substituted  for  Immersion  ? 
A.  To  gratify  the  caprice,  the  pride,  and  the  carnality  of  the 
human  mind. 

Q.  110.  Why  were  infants  baptized  or  sprinkled,  seeing  there 
is  no  such  command  or  precedent  in  the  Bible  ?  A.  Why  did  the 
Israelites  make  a  golden  calf — Uzzah  touch  the  sacred  ark — and 
Nadab  and  Abihu  offer  strange  and  uncommanded  fire  upon 
the  altal*  of  the  Lord  ?  From  the  same  principle,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  was  this  practice  first  introduced. 

Q.  111.  Did  you  ever  read  of  infant  church  membership? 
A.  Yes,  in  books  of  baptism,  but  never  in  the  Bible. 

Q.  112.  What  do  you  understand  by  "  infant  church  mem- 
bership ?''  A.  I  understand  the  phrase  to  mean,  that  infants 
are  members  of  the  visible  church. 

Q.  113.  Are  there  any  directions  given  in  the  Scriptures  for 
the  proper  discipline  and  management  of  infant  members? 
A.  None ;  the  Bible  knows  of  no  such  members  ;  it  addresses 
all  members  as  equally  qualified  by  faith  and  grace  to  attend  to 
all  the  ordinary  duties  of  Christianity. 

Q.  114.  Do  we  ever  read  of  any  members  of  the  church  who 
are  qualified  for  one  or  two  of  the  ordinances  of  the  church,  and 
disqualified  for  attendance  on  the  other  institutions  of  it? 
A.  None. 


45^  QUESTIONS  ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Q.  115.  Can  infants,  then,  be  considered  as  members  of  the 
visible  church,  seeing  they  are  not  qualified  for  the  observance 
of  the  ordinances  of  it  ?     A.  By  no  means. 

Q.  116.  Is  Jesus  Christ  represented  as  King  of  his  kingdom 
or  church?     A.  Yes.  Rev.  xix.  16. 

Q.  117.  Wherein  does  the  honour  and  glory  of  a  king  con- 
sist ?  A.  In  reigning  over  a  willing  people ;  a  people  who  love 
and  esteem  him,  and  serve  him  as  volunteers,  and  in  governing 
them  in  wisdom  and  justice. 

Q.  118.  Where  is  Christ  spoken  of  as  a  King?  A.  Psalm  ex. 
1,  2,  3 ;  John  xviii.  37. 

Q.  119.  What  is  the  character  of  his  subjects?  A.  They  are 
said  to  be  "a  willing  people" — " of  the  truth" — "  taught  of 
God" — "born  from  above" — and  "true  and  faithful." 

Q.  120.  Are  infants  of  such  a  character  ?  A.  No  ;  conse- 
quently cannot  be  subjects  of  his  visible  kingdom. 

Q.  121.  In  what  point  of  view  are  we  to  consider  infants  ?  A. 
As  inheriting  an  evil  nature — "conceived  in  sin" — "brought 
forth  in  iniquity" — "prone  to  evil" — guilty,  and  subject  to 
death,  "  the  wages  of  sin."  See  Psalm  Iviii.  3,  li.  5  ;  Job  xiv.  4; 
John  iii.  6  ;  Eph.  ii.  3. 

Q.  122.  Can  any  or  all  of  them  be  saved  who  die  before  they 
are  capable  subjects  of  instruction  ?  A.  Yes ;  by  the  merits  and 
atonement  of  Christ. 

Q.  123.  As  our  greatest  concern  is  with  them  that  live,  how 
should  we  manage  them  during  childhood  with  regard  to  their 
spiritual  concerns  ?  A.  We  should  "  bring  them  up  in  the  nur- 
ture and  admonition  of  the  Lord" — that  is,  we  should  make 
them  well  acquainted  with  the  Scriptures  of  truth  ;  make  them 
commit  to  memory  the  most  plain  and  striking  parts  of  it,  re- 
specting their  present  state  and  condition,  the  character  of  God, 
and  of  his  son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  and  the  doctrine  of  Christ. 
Above  all,  we  should  exhibit  a  good  example  before  them  for 
their  illumination,  renovation,  and  salvation,  without  endeavour- 
ing to  force  a  profession  of  religion  upon  them,  or  the  views  of 
any  particular  party  or  sect. 

Q.  124.  Should  we  ever  urge  them  to  profess  Christianity? 
A.  No.  We  should  teach  them  what  it  is  to  be  a  Christian,  and 
the  awful  consequences  of  rejecting  the  gospel  and  dying  in  in- 
fidelity; but  leave  it  to  their  own  conscience  when  and  how  to 
profess  Christianity. 


QUESTIONS  ON  INFANT  BAPTISM.  433 

Q.  125.  Would  the  sprinkling  of  them  in  infancy  tend  to  ac- 
celerate their  conversion, — would  it  secure  that  they  ever  would 
be  Christians,  or  confer  upon  them  any  Christian  benefit? 
A.  Not  in  the  least. 

Q.  126.  Have  not  many  Christians  had  their  infants  sprinkled 
or  baptized  in  infancy  ?  J..  I  make  no  doubt  but  there  were, 
and  there  are  Christians  in  this  practice. 

Q.  127.  But  would  you  make  this  a  reason  why  we,  who  are 
convinced  that  the  thing  is  a  mere  tradition  of  men,  should 
practise  it?  A.  No;  for  then  might  we  pray  to  the  Virgin 
Mary,  believe  in  purgatory,  make  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  bap- 
tizing, swear  to  "the  solemn  league,"  believe  the  doctrine  of 
consubstantiation,  or  transubstantiation,  go  into  a  monastery,  or 
take  the  vow  of  celibacy ;  because  some  good  men  have  done 
some  of  these  things. 

Q.  128.  Is  not  the  same  action  alike  good  or  bad  to  all  who 
practise  it  ?  A.  No  ;  for  there  is  a  great  difference  between  a 
person  performing  an  action,  thinking  it  right,  and  one  perform- 
ing the  same  action,  doubting  of  its  propriety  or  knowing  it  to  be 
wrong.  The  former  is  a  simple  mistake;  the  latter,  a  wilful 
transgression.  Even  civil  law  discriminates  between  the  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  demerit  in  the  action,  arising  from  the  know- 
ledge and  determination  of  the  agent.  Hence,  we  have  different 
kinds  of  murder,  and  different  punishments  annexed  to  each, 
according  to  circumstances. 

Q.  129.  Are  there  not  two  kinds  of  sins  of  ignorance?  ^.  Yes; 
there  is  an  unavoidable  ignorance  and  a  wilful  ignorance.  The 
former  exists  where  the  subject  has  no  possible  means  of  in- 
formation— such  as  the  Indian's  ignorance  of  the  Saviour :  the 
latter  exists  where  the  subject  might  know,  if  he  would  avail 
himself  of  the  means  of  knowledge  which  he  possesses — such  as 
the  Pedobaptist's  ignorance  of  the  true  subject  and  action  of 
baptism.  "Whatever  excuse  can  be  plead  for  the  former,  there 
is  no  extenuation  of  the  latter. 

Q.  130.  If  infant  baptism  be  an  evil  thing,  as  it  is  often  re- 
presented, it  appears  strange  that  the  Almighty  should  have 
tolerated  its.  jcontinuance  so  long,  and  suffered  it  to  extend  so 
far  with  impunity.  How  do  you  account  for  this  ?  A.  The 
Almighty  has  suffered  many  errors  to  exist  for  a  much  longer 
time.     The  whole  system  of  Antichrist  is  now  more  than  1200 

37 


434  QUESTIONS   ON  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

years  old,  and  paganism  is  several  thousand  years  old.  The 
future  state  only  will  exhibit  the  reasons  of  this. 

Q.  131.  How  do  you  view  all  Pedobaptists  with  regard  to  this 
ordinance  of  baptism  ?  Can  you,  according  to  the  Scriptures, 
consider  them  baptized  persons,  or  do  you  consider  them  as  un- 
baptized  ?  A.  There  is  but  one  baptism ;  and  all  who  have  not 
been  immersed  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit,  after  having  professed  the  faith  of  the  gospel,  have  never 
been  baptized,  and  are  now  in  an  unhaptized  state. 

Q.  132.  What  is  the  design  of  baptism  ?  A.  Besides  our  put- 
ting on  of  Christ,  and  having  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  put  upon  us,  we  are  baptized  for 
the  remission  of  all  past  sins,  through  faith  in  his  blood.  Thus 
Peter,  Acts  ii.  38,  commanded  three  thousand  Jews  "to  be  bap- 
tized, every  one  for  himself,  for  the  remission  of  sins ;"  thus, 
Ananias  told  Paul  to  "be  baptized  and  wash  away  his  sins." 
Hence,  baptism  "is  the  washing  of  regeneration:"  thus  the 
church  is  cleansed  through  the  hath  of  water  by  the  word,  and 
thus,  "the  like  figure"  to  Noah's  being  saved  by  water  in  the 
ark,  "baptism  does  also  now  save  us,  not  the  putting  away  of 
the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  to- 
wards God,  through  the  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Q.  133.  Why  are  many  good  people  so  much  divided  in  their 
views  of  Scripture,  seeing  they  have  but  one  Bible,  and  all  read 
it  in  the  same  language?  A.  Because  they  belong  to  difi'erent 
sects  and  have  difi'erent  systems,  and  they  rather  make  the 
Bible  bow  to  their  own  systems,  than  make  their  systems  bow 
to  the  Bible  ;  or,  in  other  words,  each  man,  too  generally,  views 
the  Bible  through  the  medium  of  his  system  ;  and,  of  course, 
it  will  appear  to  him  to  favour  it.  Just  as  if  A,  B,  and  C 
should  each  put  on  difi'erent  coloured  glasses :  A  puts  on  green 
spectacles;  B,  yellow;  and  C,  blue.  Each  of  them,  through 
his  own  glasses,  looks  at  the  Bible.  To  A,  it  appears  green ; 
to  B,  yellow ;  and  to  C,  blue.  They  begin  to  debate  on  its 
colour.  It  is  impossible  for  any  one  of  them  to  convince  an- 
other that  he  is  wrong ;  each  one  feels  a  conviction,  next  to  ab- 
solute certainty,  that  his  opinion  is  right.  But  D,  who  has  no 
spectacles  on,  and  who  is  standing  by  during  the  contest,  very 
well  knows  that  they  are  all  wrong.  He  sees  the  spectacles  on 
each  man's  nose,  and  easily  accounts  for  the  difi'erence.  Thus, 
one  professor  reads  tlie  Bible  with  John  Calvin  on  his  nose  ;  an- 


QUESTIONS   ON   INFANT   BAPTISM.  435 

other,  with  John  Wesley ;  a  third,  with  John  Gill ;  and  a  fourth, 
with  some  one  else.  Thrice  happy  the  man  who  lifts  the  Bible 
as  if  it  had  dropped  from  heaven  into  his  hand  alone ;  and  who, 
with  a  single  eye,  reads  for  himself! 

Q.  134.  Who  is  most  likely  to  understand  it  ?     A.  He  who 
practises  what  he  abeady  knows. 


APPENDIX. 


Since  "writing  the  preceding  queries  and  answers,  I  have  read 
with  approbation  a  passage  in  "  Coleridge's  Aids  to  Reflection" 
on  the  Baptismal  Rite,  which  I  deem  worthy  to  add,  by  way 
of  confirmation  of  the  views  given  in  this  treatise  on  the  scrip- 
tural subjects  of  Christian  baptism.  To  the  learned  reader  I 
need  not  say,  that  Samuel  Taylor  Coleridge  was  not  merely  a 
poet  and  a  philosopher  of  the  highest  order,  but,  by  concession, 
the  most  talented  theologian  in  the  English  church,  of  his  day. 
Some  of  the  London  reviews  have  pronounced  him  "the  greatest 
theologian  in  the  world,  of  the  first  quarter  of  the  present  cen- 
tury." That  he  was  a  man  of  the  most  philosophic  and  discri- 
minating mind,  as  well  as  of  prodigious  theological  attainments, 
no  one  who  has  read  his  various  works,  and  especially  his 
"Aids  to  Reflection,"  can  reasonably  doubt. 

As  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  church,  his  opinion  and  his 
testimony  will  weigh  more  with  the  multitude  than  any  thing 
that  a  Baptist  could  say  on  our  premises  or  reasonings.  While 
admitting  that  infant  baptism,  as  a  discretionary  and  pruden- 
tial custom  of  the  church,  may  subserve  some  good  purpose  to 
both  parents  and  children,  as  other  human  expedients,  he 
boldly  takes  the  ground  that  there  is  no  authority  for  it  in  the 
Sacred  Scriptures. 

His  words  are: — "I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  divines  in 
your  side"  (that  is,  the  Episcopal  church)  "are  chargeable  with 
a  far  more  grievous  mistake — that  of  giving  a  carnal  and  Juda- 
izing  interpretation  to  the  various  gospel  texts  in  which  the 
terms  baptism  and  baptize  occur,  contrary  to  the  express  and 
earnest  admonitions  of  the  Apostle  Paul."  "The  texts  appealed 
to,  as  commanding  or  authorizing  infant  baptism,  are  all,  with- 
out exception,  made  to  bear  a  sense  neither  designed  nor  dedu- 
cible ;  and  likewise,  (historically  considered,)  there  exists  no 
sufficient  positive  evidence  that  the  baptism  of  infants  was  in 

37*  437 


438  APPENDIX. 

stituted  by  the  Apostles,  in  the  practice  of  the  apostolic  age." 
Page  322,  Burlington  edition,  1840. 

Of  the  two  main  foundations  on  which  "  sectarians"  found  the 
practice  of  infant  baptism,  ^'household  baptisms"  and  oi  circum- 
cision, he  says  : — "  If  I  should  inform  any  one  that  I  had  called 
at  a  friend's  house,  but  had  found  nobody  at  home — the  family 
having  all  gone  to  the  play ;  and  if  he,  on  the  strength  of  this  in- 
formation, should  take  occasion  to  asperse  my  friend's  wife  for 
unmotherly  conduct  in  taking  an  infant,  six  months  old,  to  a 
crowded  theatre,  would  you  allow  him  to  press  on  the  word  *  no- 
body,' and  'all  the  family,'  in  justification  of  the  slander? 
Would  you  not  tell  him  that  the  words  were  to  be  interpreted  ac- 
cording to  the  nature  of  the  subject,  the  purpose  of  the  speaker, 
and  their  ordinary  acceptation ;  and  that  he  must,  or  might  have 
known  that  infants  of  that  age  would  not  be  admitted  into  the 
theatre  ?  Exactly  so  with  regard  to  the  words,  '  he  and  all  his 
household.'  Had  baptism  of  infants,  at  that  early  period  of  the 
gospel,  been  a  known  practice,  or  had  this  been  previously  demon- 
strated, then,  indeed,  the  argument  that,  in  all  probability,  there 
were  infants  or  young  children  in  so  large  a  family,  would  be  no 
more  objectionable  than  as  being  superfluous,  and  a  sort  of  anti- 
climax in  logic.  But,  if  the  words  are  cited  as  the  proof,  it 
would  be  a  clear  petitio  principii,  (a  begging  of  the  question,) 
though  there  had  been  nothing  else  against  it.  But  when  we 
turn  back  to  the  Scriptures  preceding  the  narrative,  and  find 
repentance  and  belief  demanded  as  the  terms  and  indispensable 
conditions  of  baptism,  then  the  case  above  imagined  applies  in 
its  full  force. 

"Equally  vain  is  the  pretended  analogy  from  circumcision, 
which  was  no  sacrament  at  all,  but  the  means  and  mark  of  a 
national  distinction."  "Nor  was  it  ever  pretended  that  any 
grace  was  conferred  by  it,  or  that  the  rite  was  significant  of  any 
inward  or  spiritual  operation."     P.  320. 

So  unanswerably  this  greatest  of  men  and  theologians  carries 
away  the  long-cherished  foundations  of  infant  baptism. 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS. 


Abraham's  two  wives— Symbols  of  two 

Covenants,  436. 
Action  of  Baptism,  116. 
Ante-Nicene,  or  Apostolic  Fathers,  343. 
Appendix,  436. 
"Arise  and  be  baptized,"  400. 
Arg.  l.—Bapto,  116. 
^.—Baptizo,  122. 
3. — Ancient  Versions,  134. 
4.— English  Translators,  139. 
6. — Reformers,   Annotators,   Para- 

phrasts,  and  Critics,  144. 
6. — English  Lexicographers,  Ency- 
clopedias, and  Reviewers   of 
the  Pedobaptist  school,  149. 
7. — Words    in    construction   with 
Baptizo,  Raino,  Rantizo,  Cheo, 
and  Louo,  such  as  epi,  en,  eis, 
ek,  and  apo,  153. 
8. — Places  where  baptism  was  an- 
ciently performed,  157. 
9. — Apostolic  allusions  to  baptism, 
161. 
10. — Passages  urged  against  immer- 
sion from  the  use  of  Baptizo 
and  Baptismos,  166. 
11. — Legal  sprinklings,  171. 
12. — Convertible  terms,  178. 
History  of  immersion,  181. 

B. 

Bible,  chapters  and  verses,  59. 

climax  of  its  moral  evidences,  37. 

denial  of,  reduced  to  an  absurdity,  32. 

history  of  one  family,  30. 

plan  of,  24. 

proper  reading  of,  61. 

writers  of,  29. 
Blessing  babes,  385. 

c. 

Carnal  ordinances,  104. 

Catechism  for  Pedobaptists,  432. 

Catechumens  a  proof  that  infant  baptism 
was  not  of  apostolic  origin,  373. 

Catholic  Church  neither  Greek  nor  Ro- 
man, 113. 


Chalmers  and  Calvin  vs.  Dr.  Miller,  165. 
Character  of  the  Man  of  Sin,  47. 
Cheever,  Dr.,  views  of  Church  and  State 

as  the  cause  of  religious  persecution 

imperfect,  413. 
Children  legally  clean  and  unclean,  337. 

holy,  examined,  384. 
Christian,  not  of,  but  in,  the  sects,  16. 
Christianity    proposes    no     hereditary 

rights,  109. 
Christianity  favourable  to  liberty.  111. 
Christian  Church  and  Jewish  nation  not 

identical,  329. 
Christian  confession,  foundation  of  the 

church,  18. 
Christian  union,  basis  of,  21. 
Church,  cradle  of  civil  liberty,  110. 
Church  and  nation,  identical  according 

to  Dr.  MUler,  328. 
Climax  of  moral  evidence,  37. 
Coleridge's  views  of  infant  baptism,  437. 
Communities    founded    on    faith    were 

never    formed    before    the  Christian 

Church,  334. 
Conversion,  five  essentials  to,  115. 
Council,  African,  decreed   infant  bap- 
tism, 356. 
Covenants  of  promise,  89. 
Covenant  of  circumcision,  89. 

with  Noah,  93. 

with  Abraham,  93. 

of  the  throne,  95. 

of  the  priesthood,  95. 

signs  and  seals  of,  97. 

summary  of,  96. 

D. 

Dedication  of  infants  and  things  a  Jew- 
ish and  Roman  custom,  332. 

Design  of  baptism,  247. 

Disauisition  on  the  phrase.  Remission  of 
sins,  as  connected  with  baptism,  262. 

Divisions  and  sects,  the  philosophy  of,  434. 

E. 

Ecclesiastical  covenants,  alleged  by  Dr. 
Miller,  are  contrary  to  the  letter  and 
spirit  of  Christianity  and  its  gospel, 
323. 

439 


440 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS. 


Errors  of  theory  and  practice,  the  most 
gross  aberrations  from  Christian  doc- 
trine, are  traced  to  the  first  century  by 
Isaac  Taylor,  in  his  Ancient  but  not 
Original  Christianity,  348. 

Eternal  life  neither  founded  on  nor  pro- 
mised in  the  Jewish  institution,  107. 

Evangelical  reformation,  two  cardinal 
points  of,  20. 

Evidences  of  the  Bible,  intrinsic  and  ex- 
trinsic, 27. 

Evils  of  infant  baptism : 

1.  Will-worship,  405. 

2.  Carnalizes     and     secularizes     the 

church,  406. 

3.  Infringes  upon  liberty  of  conscience 

and  freedom  of  action,  408. 

4.  Fosters  a  persecuting  spirit,  410. 

F. 

Faith,  63. 
the  noblest  faculty  of  man,  66. 
the  principle  of  all  moral  culture,  67. 
different  kinds  of,  69. 
and  its  object  distingiiished,  71. 

Eundamental  proposition  of  Christian- 
ity, 74. 

Elesh  and  spirit,  liberty  and  necessity, 
102. 

G. 

Good  oliye-tree,  parable  of,  332. 

H. 

Hannah's  dedication  of  her  son  con- 
trasted with  infant  dedication  in  bap- 
tism, 113. 
History  of  Sprinkling,  191. 
Historians  quoted : 
Waddington,  187. 
Giesler,  Cave,  187. 
Neander,  186. 
Mosheim,  186. 
Wall,  192. 
Sotus,  194. 
Mcde,  194. 

Sir  N.  Knatchbull,  194. 
introduced  by  the  Puritans,  196. 
Council  of  Ravenna,  200. 
compulsion  into  Virginia,  197. 
the  first  law  enacting  it,  190. 
not  generally  introduced,  200. 
Household  baptism    not  including  in- 
fantp : 
Dr.    Whitby,    Doddridge,    Limborch, 

Lawson,  Uenry,  Calvin,  231. 
Burkit,  D'Oyly,  and  Mant  required  the 
proof  of  a  negative,  2.32. 
Household  baptisms  examined,  231. 


I. 

Infant  baptism  first  named  by  Tertul- 
lian,  355. 
gradually  introduced,  373. 
to  take  away  original  sin,  375. 
insupportable  by  Scripture,  conceded 

by  Bishop  Kenrick,  339. 
contrary  to  the  clearest    statements 
and  reasonings,  390. 
Infant  communion  and  infant  baptism 
equally  common  in  the  ancient  churcht 
352. 
Infant  dedication  a  papistical  notion,  113. 

unknown  in  the  Bible,  112. 
Interpretation  of  Scripture,  61. 

seven  rules  of,  61. 
Introduction,  13. 

J. 

Jewish  institution  carnal,  105. 

not  a  proselj-ting  institution,  109. 

not  identical  with  the  Christian  insti- 
tution, shown,  239. 

further  developed,  246. 
Jewish  nation  and  a  church  contrasted, 

239. 
Jewish  circTimcision  and  Christian  bap- 
tism differ  in  sixteen  points,  242. 
John's  baptism  not  a  Jewish  rite,  216. 

never  repeated  to  the  posterity  of  the 
baptized,  217. 

it  required  a  moral  qualification,  218. 

K. 

Kenrick,  Bishop,  candour  of,  317. 
his  logical  arguments,  316. 
surrenders  the  commission  as  not  au- 
thorizing infant  baptism,  319. 

L. 

Lexicographers,  twelve  quoted  on  bap- 

tizo,  123. 
Liberty  and  necessity,  102. 
Life  and   immortality  no  part  of  the 

Jew's  religion,  106. 

M. 

Miller,  Doctor  and  Professor,  offers  ten 
arguments — they  are  considered,  321. 

Monastic  life,  celibacy,  and  infant  bap- 
tism equally  depend  on  tradition,  341. 

N. 

Nation  and  church  distinguished,  239. 
New  institution,  102. 
Novatian's  baptism,  191. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS. 


441 


Numbers  immersed  and  sprinkled  in  all 
past  time,  201. 

0. 

Offices  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit 

stated,  290. 
Oikos  and  oikia  considered,  419. 
On  the  question  of  household  baptism, 

419. 

P. 

Parents  or  children  responsible,  391. 

Parmly,  Dr.,  letter  to  Prof.  Anthon,  180. 

Pedobaptist  persecutions  in  New  Eng- 
land and  Virginia,  410. 
in  Geneva,  414. 

Personal  responsibility  and  infant  bap- 
tism irreconcilable,  391. 

Pouring  inhibited,  191. 

Preface,  5. 

Promise,  Acts  ii.  3,  not  infant  baptism, 
383. 

Prophecies  numerous  and  various,  their 
use,  41. 

Proposition,  soul-redeeming,  74. 

Q. 

Questions  propounded  and  answered  on 
all  the  attitudes  and  positions  of  in- 


fant baptism,  to  the  number  of  one 
hundred  and  thirty-four,  422. 

R. 

Reviews : 

1.  Bishop  Kenrick,  313. 

2.  Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton,  326. 

3.  Dr.  Miller  and  Dr.  Wall,  339. 

4.  Dr.  Miller,  Dr.  Wall,  and   others, 

352. 

5.  Continued,  305. 

6.  Dr.  Kurtz  of  Baltimore,  378. 

7.  Rev.  Edwin  Hall,  378. 

8.  Professor  Stuart  of  Andover,  392. 

9.  Dr.  C.  Taylor,  editor  of   Calmet's 

Dictionary,  417. 

s. 

Sprinkling  on  the  face,  430. 

why  substituted  for  immersion,  431. 

w. 

Why  are  many  good  people  so  much  di- 
vided in  their  views  of  Scripture,  see- 
ing they  have  but  one  Bible,  and  read 
it  in  the  same  language  ?  434. 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 

QUOTED  IN  THIS  TREATISE  IN  PROOF  OP  THE  MEANING  OF  BAPTISMO. 


Alstedius,  146. 
Ambrose,  182. 
Anthon,  Professor,  180. 
Aratus,  129. 
Aristotle,  128. 
Aristophanes,  130. 
Augusti,  146. 
Assembly  of  Divines,  163. 

Barnabas,  181. 

Barnes,  162. 

Basil,  182. 

Bass,  125. 

Benson,  134. 

Beza,  140. 

Blackstone,  Sir  William,  133. 

Bloomfield,  146. 

Bossuet,  146. 

Bowen,  183. 

Brand's  Cyclopedia,  70. 

Brenner,  184. 

Bretschneider,  125. 

Butman,  146. 

Buddeus,  146. 

Buxtorf,  135. 

Calvin,  145. 

Campbell,  Dr.  George,  142. 

Carson,  Dr.  Alexander,  127. 

Casaubon,  145, 169. 

Castel,  135. 

Chambers's  Encyclopedia,  70. 

Chalmers,  Dr.  Thomas,  163. 

Clark,  S.,  162. 

Cumming,  Dr.,  133. 

CyrU,  169. 

Diodorus  Siculus,  130. 
Doddridge,  Dr.,  163. 


Dodwell,  169. 
Donnegan,  124. 

Edwards,  Jonathan,  Dr.,  133. 
Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  147. 
Encyclopedia  Ecclesiastica,  182. 
Encyclopedia  Britannica,  180. 
Edinburgh  Review,  184. 
Epictetus,  130. 
Ernesti,  134. 
Ewing,  GreviUe,  Dr.,  146. 

Gale,  Dr.,  127. 
Gotch,  136. 
Greenfield,  124. 
Grotius,  145, 169. 
Gurtlerus,  146. 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  182. 

Heliodorus,  130. 
Henderson,  Dr.,  135. 
Heraclides  Ponticus,  129, 
Hermes,  181. 
Herodotus,  129. 
Hippocrates,  130. 
Homer,  128. 
Hopkins,  Bishop,  169. 
Horn,  134. 
Hospinianus,  145. 

Ikenius,  169. 
Johnson,  Dr.,  146. 
Jones,  124. 
«»c«ephus,  128. 
Justin  Martyr,  130. 
Judith,  chap.  xii.  5.  131. 


Le  Clero,  169. 
Leigh,  146,  169. 


443 


444 


INDEX   OP  AUTHOR 


Locke,  162. 
Lucian,  127. 
Luther,  144. 

McKnight,  Dr.,  140. 
Michaelis,  135. 
Mosheim,  186. 

Nazianzen,  182. 
Neander,  186. 
Nicholson,  Bishop,  163. 

Owen,  Dr.,  133. 

Parkhurst,  124. 

Pasor,  123. 

Patavius,  145. 

Penn,  139. 

Pickering,  125. 

Pindar,  128. 

Pirie,  134. 

Plato,  De  Rep.,  129,  130. 

Plutarch,  127. 

Pollock,  166. 

Polybius,  127. 


Schleusner's  Dictionary,  123. 

Scholz,  146. 

Seeker,  162. 

Sirach,  131. 

Sherlock,  Bishop,  123. 

Stackhouse,  183. 

Stephanas's  Dictionary,  123. 

Stokius,  125. 

Strabo,  127. 

Stuart,  Professor,  126. 

Taylor,  Bishop,  133,  138. 
Taylor's  Calmet,  70. 
Tertullian,  182. 
Themistius,  128. 
Tholuck,  202. 
Thompson,  139. 
Tillotson,  162, 169. 
Tyndale,  136. 

Usher,  188. 

Venema,  146. 
Vitringa,  133. 
Vossius!  146,  183. 


Reeves,  183. 

Reynolds,  Bishop,  168. 

Review,  English  Monthly,  vol.  70. 

Richardson's  Dictionary,  146. 

Robertson,  123. 

Rosenmuller's  Dictionary,  123. 

Rost,  Professor,  125. 

Salmasius,  14S. 
Bcapula,  123. 


Wall,  Dr.,  162,  190,  403,  404. 
Waterland,  133. 
Wells,  162. 
Wesley,  John,  139. 
WickliflFe,  136. 
Witsius,  182. 

Xenophon,  129. 

Zanchius,  145. 


THE  END. 


Princeton  Theological   Seminary   Libraries 


1    1012  01196  8353 


DATE  DUE 


uL.  _  :  m 

MAY  1  2  200i 

GAYLORD  #3523PI        Printed  in  USA 


